On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 17:26, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 17:08:42 -0300, Eugeni Dodonov < > eugeni.dodo...@intel.com> wrote: > > With Lynx Point, we need to use SBI to communicate with the display clock > > control. This commit adds helper functions to access the registers via > > SBI. > > > > v2: de-inline the function and address changes in bits names > > > > v3: protect operations with dpio_lock, increase timeout to 100 for > > paranoia sake. > > > > v1 Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.v...@gmail.com> > > Hmm, busy-waits upon a register change. Does it have to be atomic? Can > it really be called in IRQ context? Can I have a sleepy version that > won't cause audible stutters for the normal case? (Admittedly > single-core processors are history...) > The original version wasn't atomic and wasn't called in IRQ context, but Daniel suggested that I should be more paranoid about this so I followed his idea :). Anyway, both versions (this one and previous one) work; would both you and Daniel be happy if I do another version of this keeping the dpio_lock handling but dropping atomic bits? -- Eugeni Dodonov <http://eugeni.dodonov.net/>
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
