On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 05:55:19PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 04:35:57PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > > > Harmonise the completion logic between the non-blocking and normal > > > wait_rendering paths, and move that logic into a common function. > > > > > > In the process, we note that the last_write_seqno is by definition the > > > earlier of the two read/write seqnos and so all successful waits will > > > have passed the last_write_seqno. Therefore we can unconditionally clear > > > the write seqno and its domains in the completion logic. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> > > > > Looks really nice. Still I'd like to see some i-g-t nastiness > > increases before we frob this code some more. So I'll punt on this for > > now ... > > I'm happy about the new tests, so merged this patch to dinq. Thanks for > botht the cleanup and the igt tests. Oops, didn't spot that the compile failed and hence the branch was never pushed. Can I have v2 please? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
