[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-18 Thread Christian König
Am 18.10.2016 um 16:23 schrieb Rob Clark: > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Christian König > wrote: >> Am 16.10.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Rob Clark: >>> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we >>> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is a

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-18 Thread Christian König
Am 16.10.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Rob Clark: > Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we > fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired > first, and in it's ->enable_signaling() callback, it will install cb's on > it's array-member fences,

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-18 Thread Christian König
Am 17.10.2016 um 20:02 schrieb Rob Clark: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Maarten Lankhorst > wrote: >> Op 16-10-16 om 18:03 schreef Rob Clark: >>> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we >>> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aq

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-18 Thread Rob Clark
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 18.10.2016 um 16:23 schrieb Rob Clark: >> >> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Christian König >> wrote: >>> >>> Am 16.10.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Rob Clark: Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation.

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-18 Thread Rob Clark
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:07 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 16.10.2016 um 18:03 schrieb Rob Clark: >> >> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we >> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired >> first, and in it's ->enable_signalin

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-17 Thread Rob Clark
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 16-10-16 om 18:03 schreef Rob Clark: >> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we >> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired >> first, and in it's ->enable_signaling()

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-17 Thread Maarten Lankhorst
Op 16-10-16 om 18:03 schreef Rob Clark: > Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we > fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired > first, and in it's ->enable_signaling() callback, it will install cb's on > it's array-member fences, so

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-16 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 12:03:53PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we > fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired > first, and in it's ->enable_signaling() callback, it will install cb's on > it's arra

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-16 Thread Rob Clark
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 12:03:53PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: >> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we >> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired >> first, and in it's ->enab

[RFC] dma-buf/fence: avoid holding lock while calling cb

2016-10-16 Thread Rob Clark
Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is aquired first, and in it's ->enable_signaling() callback, it will install cb's on it's array-member fences, so the array-member's lock is acquired second. Bu