Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-06-28 09:06:37) > Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > If we have more interrupts pending (because we know there are more > > breadcrumb signals before the completion), then we do not need to > > trigger an irq_seqno_barrier or even wakeup the task on this interrupt > > as there will be another. To allow some margin of error (we are trying > > to work around incoherent seqno after all), we wakeup the breadcrumb > > before the target as well as on the target. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Thanks for splitting this out. > > Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> And applied, thanks for the review. Fingers crossed as always when touching interrupt handling. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
