On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 11:55:49AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> When waiting for a single fence beneath a syncobj, forgo our open coding
> for waiting over multiple fences and call the driver specific
> dma_fence_wait_timeout(). This gives the opportunity for the driver to
> handle it more efficiently then the lcd of signal callbacks, and avoids
> the temporary allocations and array iterations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
Aside: Do the igts test both the single and multi-case?
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> index d4f4ce484529..c0f787f7a298 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> @@ -695,6 +695,14 @@ static signed long drm_syncobj_array_wait_timeout(struct drm_syncobj **syncobjs,
> signed long ret;
> uint32_t signaled_count, i;
>
> + /* KISS for the common case of waiting for a single submitted fence. */
> + if (count == 1 && (fence = drm_syncobj_fence_get(syncobjs[0]))) {
> + ret = dma_fence_wait_timeout(fence, true, timeout);
> + dma_fence_put(fence);
> + *idx = 0;
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> entries = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*entries), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!entries)
> return -ENOMEM;
> --
> 2.17.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
