On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:01:08PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:40:23PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Just use a spinlock to protect them. > > > > v2: Rebase onto the new object create refcount fix patch. > > > > v3: Don't kill dev_priv->mm.object_memory as requested by Chris and > > hence just use a spinlock instead of atomic_t. > > > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Sadly, I have no better answer to my desire have my cake and eat it. > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Queued for -next, thanks for the review. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
