On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:19:11AM +0100, John Harrison wrote:
> 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
Op 12-05-16 om 23:06 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
> From: John Harrison
>
> The intended usage model for struct fence is that the signalled status
> should be set on demand rather than polled. That is, there should not
> be a need for a 'signaled' function to be called everytime the status
>
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 se
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-
From: John Harrison
The intended usage model for struct fence is that the signalled status
should be set on demand rather than polled. That is, there should not
be a need for a 'signaled' function to be called everytime the status
is queried. Instead, 'something' should be done to enable a signal
