Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-05-09 15:27:58) > In the next few patches, we want to abuse tasklet to avoid ksoftirqd > latency along critical paths. To make that abuse easily to swallow, > first coat the tasklet in a little syntactic sugar. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 4 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 2 +- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_tasklet.h | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_engine_cs.c | 11 ++- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c | 8 +-- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 18 ++--- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h | 3 +- > 7 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_tasklet.h > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 63c96c2b8fcf..59e04387a27c 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -3036,7 +3036,7 @@ i915_gem_reset_prepare_engine(struct intel_engine_cs *engine) > * Turning off the execlists->tasklet until the reset is over > * prevents the race. > */ > - tasklet_disable(&engine->execlists.tasklet); > + i915_tasklet_lock(&engine->execlists.tasklet); Hmm, probably sensible to stick to disable/enable: - better match to tasklet_interface (no arbitrary impedance mismatch) - they are counting locks rather than mutex which we commonly think of for lock/unlock (more like a semaphore). After dropping the custom flush+disable wrapper, there's no good reason to have a custom name. Thoughts? -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
