Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:

> While we ordinarily do not skip submit-fences due to the accompanying
> hook that we want to callback on execution, a submit-fence on the same
> timeline is meaningless.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> index 589739bfee25..be2ce9065a29 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> @@ -1242,6 +1242,9 @@ i915_request_await_execution(struct i915_request *rq,
>                       continue;
>               }
>  
> +             if (fence->context == rq->fence.context)
> +                     continue;
> +
>               /*
>                * We don't squash repeated fence dependencies here as we
>                * want to run our callback in all cases.

The comment in here makes me nervous. Is this skipping on same context
other than squashing?

-Mika

> -- 
> 2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to