Quoting Ville Syrjälä (2017-10-27 12:27:59)
> On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:56:39AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > An interesting snippet from Sandybridge's prm:
> >
> > "Although a Ring Buffer can be enabled in the non-empty state, it must
> > not be disabled unless it is empty. Attempting to disabl
On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 12:56:39AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> An interesting snippet from Sandybridge's prm:
>
> "Although a Ring Buffer can be enabled in the non-empty state, it must
> not be disabled unless it is empty. Attempting to disable a Ring Buffer
> in the non-empty state is UNDEFINED.
Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-10-27 07:44:31)
> Chris Wilson writes:
>
> > An interesting snippet from Sandybridge's prm:
> >
> > "Although a Ring Buffer can be enabled in the non-empty state, it must
> > not be disabled unless it is empty. Attempting to disable a Ring Buffer
> > in the non-empty s
Chris Wilson writes:
> An interesting snippet from Sandybridge's prm:
>
> "Although a Ring Buffer can be enabled in the non-empty state, it must
> not be disabled unless it is empty. Attempting to disable a Ring Buffer
> in the non-empty state is UNDEFINED."
>
> Let's avoid the undefined behaviou
An interesting snippet from Sandybridge's prm:
"Although a Ring Buffer can be enabled in the non-empty state, it must
not be disabled unless it is empty. Attempting to disable a Ring Buffer
in the non-empty state is UNDEFINED."
Let's avoid the undefined behaviour as we disable the rings prior to
