On 27 July 2017 at 16:30, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 03:45:11PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> Hi Maarten >> >> On 27 July 2017 at 13:58, Maarten Lankhorst >> <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > drm_atomic_commit could previous have always failed when waits failed, >> > but locking was always done uninterruptibly. Add infrastructure to make >> > it possible for callers to choose interruptible locking, and convert the >> > 4 most common ioctl's to use it. >> > >> > All other atomic helpers can be converted when Daniel's "acquire_ctx >> > for everyone!" patch series lands. >> > >> There's a KMS locking documentation/example in drm_modeset_lock.c. >> Can you please update that as well? > > Not sure what we should update there? As-is it still works for the > non-interruptible case. Or do you mean we should have an interruptible > variant of it too? > Don't think another example is needed. After the example add a line which says "hey you can have Interruptable locking", pointing to drm_modeset_acquire_init and/or drm_modeset_backoff. Updating the drm_modeset_acquire_init() call to have the flags argument would also be nice. -Emil _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
