2015-06-30 11:25 GMT-03:00 Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:53:06AM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote: >> From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Make sure we're not going to have weird races in really weird cases >> where a lot of different CRTCs are doing rendering and modesets at the >> same time. >> >> With this change, we can start removing the struct_mutex locking we >> have around FBC in the next patches. The only struct_mutex requirement >> will be around intel_fbc_update(), since it's the place that does the >> CFB stolen memory allocations. >> >> v2: >> - Rebase (6 months later) >> - Also lock debugfs and stolen. >> v3: >> - Don't lock a single value read (Chris). >> - Replace lockdep assertions with WARNs (Daniel). >> - Improve commit message. >> - Don't forget intel_pre_plane_update() locking. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > > I haven't spotted anything scary, but I only did a cursory scan of the > patch for errors, and not down a delve into each function looking for > trouble. Thanks for the reviews! I'll add the ABBA comment and introduce a new patch for the struct_mutex removal you spotted. > > Can I pretty please ask that you split fbc out of i915_gem_stolen.c > before this patch (rather than teach stolen more about fbc)? Ok, I'll do it. > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre -- Paulo Zanoni _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
