On 13/05/2016 08:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:06:34PM +0100, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
+void i915_gem_request_notify(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, bool fence_locked)
+{
+ struct drm_i915_gem_request *req, *req_next;
+ unsigned long flags;
u32 seqno;
- seqno = req->engine->get_seqno(req->engine);
+ if (list_empty(&engine->fence_signal_list))
+ return;
+
+ if (!fence_locked)
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->fence_lock, flags);
+
+ if (engine->irq_seqno_barrier)
+ engine->irq_seqno_barrier(engine);
+ seqno = engine->get_seqno(engine);
+
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(req, req_next, &engine->fence_signal_list,
signal_link) {
NO, NO, NO. As we said the very first time, you cannot do this from an
irq handler.
The current code is already bad enough, this is making it large constant
+ N times worse. Please do look at how to do signal driven fences in O(1)
that I posted many months ago and several times since.
If you have a better solution available then please post it in a form
that can be merged and get it reviewed and accepted.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
