On 11/03/2015 16:44, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On 03/11/2015 09:14 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 02:53:39PM +, John Harrison wrote:
On 05/03/2015 14:49, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:57:31PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
From: John Harrison
The L
On 03/11/2015 09:14 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 02:53:39PM +, John Harrison wrote:
>> On 05/03/2015 14:49, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:57:31PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
From: John Harrison
The LRC submission code requi
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 02:53:39PM +, John Harrison wrote:
> On 05/03/2015 14:49, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:57:31PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> >>From: John Harrison
> >>
> >>The LRC submission code requires a request for tracking purposes. It does
> >>n
On 05/03/2015 14:49, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:57:31PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
From: John Harrison
The LRC submission code requires a request for tracking purposes. It does not
actually require that request to 'complete' it simply uses it for keeping hold
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 01:57:31PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison
>
> The LRC submission code requires a request for tracking purposes. It does not
> actually require that request to 'complete' it simply uses it for keeping hold
> of reference counts on contexts and
From: John Harrison
The LRC submission code requires a request for tracking purposes. It does not
actually require that request to 'complete' it simply uses it for keeping hold
of reference counts on contexts and such like.
In the case where the ring buffer is completely full, the LRC code looks
