On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 03:15:05PM +0100, John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 2a5351d..8c68219 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -2886,7 +2886,7 @@ i915_gem_object_sync(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, > seqno = obj->last_read_seqno; > /* Optimization: Avoid semaphore sync when we are sure we already > * waited for an object with higher seqno */ > - if (seqno <= from->semaphore.sync_seqno[idx]) > + if (seqno <= from->semaphore.sync_seqno[idx]) /* <--- broken?! needs to use i915_seqno_passed()??? */ No, becuase hw semaphores don't wrap around so we actual need to check for <=, not the wrap-around logic seqno_passed has. If you feel like pls submit a patch to add a comment here. btw you're threading looks a bit funny, instead of patches all being in-reply-to the cover letter they're all in-reply-to the previous patch. Presuming you don't have a funky .gitconfig recent git should do this in the preferred form by default. -Daniel > return 0; > > ret = i915_gem_check_olr(obj->ring, seqno); > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- 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
