Waiting for seqno-1 in our object synchronization code is an implementation detail given how we've decided to do the waits within the rest of our code. Requested-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widawsky at intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 6 ++++++ 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 0115b12..71934dd 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -2002,7 +2002,7 @@ i915_gem_object_sync(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, } - ret = to->sync_to(to, from, seqno - 1); + ret = to->sync_to(to, from, seqno); if (!ret) from->sync_seqno[idx] = seqno; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c index dfdb613..467b331 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c @@ -482,6 +482,12 @@ intel_ring_sync(struct intel_ring_buffer *waiter, MI_SEMAPHORE_COMPARE | MI_SEMAPHORE_REGISTER; + /* Throughout all of the GEM code, seqno passed implies our current + * seqno is >= the last seqno executed. However for hardware the + * comparison is strictly greater than. + */ + seqno -= 1; + ret = intel_ring_begin(waiter, 4); if (ret) return ret; -- 1.7.10
