On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 01:52:18PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > From: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > We currently call intel_mark_idle() too often, as we do so as a > side-effect of processing the request queue. However, we the calls to > intel_mark_idle() are expected to be paired with a call to > intel_mark_busy() (or else we try to idle the hardware by accessing > registers that are already disabled). Make the idle/busy tracking > explicit to prevent the multiple calls. > > v2: From Paulo > - Make it compile > - Drop the __i915_add_request chunk > > Reported-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > Tested-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 8 ++++++++ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 9 +++++++++ > 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+) > > > Chris did not reply to my review comments yet, so I just went and implemented > them. We need at least an ACK form him here before merging. Didn't see them... Why have you altered the logic? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
