Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> As we now check if the seqno is complete in order to signal the fence,
> we can also decide not to wake up the first_waiter until it is ready
> (since it is waiting on the same seqno). The only caveat is that if we
> need the engine->irq_seqno_barrier to enforce some coherency between an
> interrupt and the seqno read, we have to always wake the waiter into to
> perform that heavyweight barrier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> index 3f39e36fa566..c902aff61a9d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> @@ -1059,7 +1059,8 @@ static void notify_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> wait->seqno))
> rq = wait->request;
>
> - wake_up_process(wait->tsk);
> + if (rq || engine->irq_seqno_barrier)
> + wake_up_process(wait->tsk);
This also needs to be respinned on top of getting the request ref.
Were you thinking < gen5 or daydreaming that the next shiny one doesn't
need a barrier? :)
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@intel.com>
> } else {
> __intel_engine_disarm_breadcrumbs(engine);
> }
> --
> 2.11.0
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
