Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > While we ordinarily do not skip submit-fences due to the accompanying > hook that we want to callback on execution, a submit-fence on the same > timeline is meaningless. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c > index 589739bfee25..be2ce9065a29 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c > @@ -1242,6 +1242,9 @@ i915_request_await_execution(struct i915_request *rq, > continue; > } > > + if (fence->context == rq->fence.context) > + continue; > + > /* > * We don't squash repeated fence dependencies here as we > * want to run our callback in all cases. The comment in here makes me nervous. Is this skipping on same context other than squashing? -Mika > -- > 2.20.1 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
