On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:55:29AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c > index 3cfcc78..3a3ba81 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c > @@ -812,6 +812,7 @@ gen8_ring_sync(struct intel_ring_buffer *waiter, > > intel_ring_emit(waiter, MI_SEMAPHORE_WAIT | > MI_SEMAPHORE_GLOBAL_GTT | > + MI_SEMAPHORE_POLL | > MI_SEMAPHORE_SAD_GTE_SDD);
I was thinking that we shouldn't need this. However the docs suck a bit and they don't actually specify whether the hardware will wait for the signal before even checking the semaphore once. But that sounds so wrong that it can't possibly be true. > intel_ring_emit(waiter, seqno); > intel_ring_emit(waiter, > -- > 1.8.5.3 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
