On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 07:38:27PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
| * Luis Claudio R. Goncalves | 2013-03-22 22:30:03 [-0300]:
|
| What about this:
|
| diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
| index de45b60..9b51712 100644
| --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
| +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
| @@ -91,7 +91,6 @@ i915_gem_wait_for_error(struct drm_device *dev)
| {
| struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
| struct completion *x = &dev_priv->error_completion;
| - unsigned long flags;
| int ret;
|
| if (!atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.wedged))
| @@ -116,9 +115,7 @@ i915_gem_wait_for_error(struct drm_device *dev)
| * end up waiting upon a subsequent completion event that
| * will never happen.
| */
| - spin_lock_irqsave(&x->wait.lock, flags);
| - x->done++;
| - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&x->wait.lock, flags);
| + complete(x);
| }
| return 0;
| }
| @@ -946,12 +943,9 @@ i915_gem_check_wedge(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
| if (atomic_read(&dev_priv->mm.wedged)) {
| struct completion *x = &dev_priv->error_completion;
| bool recovery_complete;
| - unsigned long flags;
|
| /* Give the error handler a chance to run. */
| - spin_lock_irqsave(&x->wait.lock, flags);
| - recovery_complete = x->done > 0;
| - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&x->wait.lock, flags);
| + recovery_complete = completion_done(x);
|
| /* Non-interruptible callers can't handle -EAGAIN, hence return
| * -EIO unconditionally for these. */
Good catch. The resulting code is cleaner. I took the simplest approach while
trying to fix the issue, but your solution is more elegant.
| @@ -4366,7 +4360,7 @@ static bool mutex_is_locked_by(struct mutex *mutex, struct task_struct *task)
| if (!mutex_is_locked(mutex))
| return false;
|
| -#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES)
| +#if (defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES)) && !defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_BASE)
| return mutex->owner == task;
| #else
| /* Since UP may be pre-empted, we cannot assume that we own the lock */
I was trying to keep the behavior of CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES, but we do have
the RT counterpart, CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES. So, yours is probably the
right one.
| I'm not very happy with the complete() here, I am not sure what kind of
| problem they try to solve here…
I was looking at the code and IMHO it seems to fit there perfectly.
Cheers,
Luis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
