On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 09:22:43AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:39 PM, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 11:02:16PM +0200, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> We need some protection for the FBC state, and since struct_mutex > >> is it currently in most places, make sure all FBC update/disable > >> calles are protected by it. > > > > Why don't you create a new mutex only for fbc update? > > Yeah, if it's not core gem state please don't spread the usage of > dev->struct_mutex. Eventually we need to slash that one into pieces, > but until that happens making things worse doesn't help. I don't think I'm making things worse. struct_mutex is the lock that protects the fbc state currently, except we forgot to grab it in a some places. I'd rather fix this first, and then as a followup someone can start to think about using a new lock for fbc. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
