On 09/29/2014 08:20 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 02:20:27PM +0800, Jike Song wrote:
On 09/15/2014 08:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
Now we tackle the functions also called from interrupt handlers.
- intel_check_page_flip is exclusively called from irq handlers, so a
plain spin_lock is all we need. In i915_irq.c we have the convention
to give all such functions an _irq_handler postfix, but that would
look strange and als be a bit a misleading name. I've opted for a
WARN_ON(!in_irq()) instead.
Hi Daniel,
Is it possible to use in_interrupt() instead? Sorry to tell that, in
our iGVT-g implementation, the host i915 irq handler needs to be called
in a non hardirq driven context. i.e. a tasklet or workqueue.
Hm, why that? Depending upon how you do this you might break a lot of the
interrupt related locking we have ... This is a crucial integration issue,
which patch does that change?
-Daniel
The RFC patch set is not sent out yet, hopefully in 1~2 days :)
Yes I know it's not a good implementation ... I also wish there would be
a better way to go :)
--
Thanks,
Jike
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
