On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 11:21:22AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > On to, 2017-03-30 at 15:50 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > As we now distinguish everywhere that can call > > i915_gem_retire_requests() following a successful wait_for_idle, we can > > remove the duplication by moving that call into i915_gem_wait_for_idle() > > itself. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > <SNIP> > > > @@ -4180,8 +4180,6 @@ fault_irq_set(struct drm_i915_private *i915, > > goto err_unlock; > > > > /* Retire to kick idle work */ > > Stale comment, best before date was yesterday. > > i915_gem_idle_gpu or something might be more descriptive now. In the past it was actually called i915_gpu_idle(). It evolved from that as that isn't very clear what it actually does, and predated GEM (i.e. it also dealt with DRI1). I like having the "wait" in the name, as that should make the might_sleep() very clear and ties in nicely with passing around the wait-flags. i915_gem_wait_for_idle() is still my favourite, yet. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
