Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-01-16 09:48:48)
>
> On 15/01/2018 20:43, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > +static struct dma_fence *alloc_dma_fence(void)
> > +{
> > + struct dma_fence *dma;
> > +
> > + dma = kmalloc(sizeof(*dma), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (dma)
> > + dma_fence_init(dma, &mock_fence_ops, &mock_fence_lock, 0, 0);
> > +
> > + return dma;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct i915_sw_fence *
> > +wrap_dma_fence(struct dma_fence *dma, unsigned long delay)
>
> await_dma_fence?
Hmm, but no, I think I prefer having the distinction that this is
creating a i915_sw_fence rather than attaching it to an existing fence,
which is what the await routines do.
[snip]
> > +skip:
> > + dma_fence_signal(dma);
> > +
> > + if (!i915_sw_fence_done(timeout) || !i915_sw_fence_done(not)) {
> > + pr_err("Fences unsignaled\n");
> > + goto err;
> > + }
> > +
> > + free_fence(fetch_and_zero(¬));
> > + free_fence(fetch_and_zero(&timeout));
>
> A bit of an overkill with fetch_and_zero.
'Twas forgotten leftovers.
> > + dma_fence_put(dma);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +err:
> > + dma_fence_signal(dma);
> > + if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(timeout))
> > + free_fence(timeout);
> > + if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(not))
> > + free_fence(not);
> > + dma_fence_put(dma);
> > + return err;
> > +}
> > +
> > int i915_sw_fence_mock_selftests(void)
> > {
> > static const struct i915_subtest tests[] = {
> > @@ -618,6 +754,7 @@ int i915_sw_fence_mock_selftests(void)
> > SUBTEST(test_chain),
> > SUBTEST(test_ipc),
> > SUBTEST(test_timer),
> > + SUBTEST(test_dma_fence),
> > };
> >
> > return i915_subtests(tests, NULL);
> >
>
> Looks OK anyway.
>
> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Ta,
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
