On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:40:23PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Just use a spinlock to protect them.
> 
> v2: Rebase onto the new object create refcount fix patch.
> 
> v3: Don't kill dev_priv->mm.object_memory as requested by Chris and
> hence just use a spinlock instead of atomic_t.
> 
> Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>

Sadly, I have no better answer to my desire have my cake and eat it.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>

Now, I guess to pester Ben to make sure there is adequate^Wsuperficial
per-vma, per-ctx, per-file accounting.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to