On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 05:42:12PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > Lets see if I got it right: By making the returned object pinned and > having the caller unpin when done with it, it now can always be in > "dontneed" state, and will be a shrinker candidate only (or as soon) > when it is unpinned, correct? > > I just don't get at the moment, if previously there was some race or > bad interaction with less pinning and that signaling using > _EXEC_OBJECT_PURGEABLE? The code was using overzealous pinning (too much too early), did too much work manipulating tricky state and introduced an unneeded flag into a user API field. It is very clumsy. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
