Am 31.07.19 um 15:58 schrieb Chris Wilson: > Quoting Christian König (2019-07-31 14:34:28) >> Am 31.07.19 um 14:33 schrieb Chris Wilson: >>> Quoting Christian König (2019-07-31 12:38:53) >>>> Complete the abstraction of the ww_mutex inside the reservation object. >>>> >>>> This allows us to add more handling and debugging to the reservation >>>> object in the future. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> >>> Looks entirely mechanical, >>> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Quietly opines for s/reservation_object/dma_reservation/ >> I was thinking about that as well because "reservation_object" is just a >> rather long name and not very descriptive. >> >> But I'm not sure if dma_reservation fits either. How about something >> like dma_cntrl? > Reservation kind of works because of historical usage, but is itself > rather long. Control doesn't mean much to me. dma_sequence? Maybe just > dma_syncpt, as the snapshot of fences is itself a fence / > synchronisation point. Though that is at odds with other usage of > syncpt, we have an unordered collection of fences across multiple > timelines, as opposed to a single point along a timeline. > > Fwiw, we use i915_active for the similar purpose of tracking the active > collection of fences, so maybe dma_active? In amdgpu we have amdgpu_sync for that, but that isn't much descriptive either. Ok, let's stick with dma_reservation for now unless somebody has a better idea. Christian. > -Chris
