Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 09/17] drm/radeon: use common fence implementation for fences

[Daniel Vetter]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But like I've said fence->signaled is optional so you don't need this
> necessarily, as long as radeon eventually calls fence_signaled once
> the fence has completed.

Actually I've chatted a bit with Maarten about the different ways we
could restrict both the calling context and the implementations for
fence callbacks to avoid surprises. One is certainyl that we need
WARN_ON(in_interrupt) around the wait, enable_singaling and add
callback stuff.

But we also talked about ensure that the ->signaled callback never
sleeps by wrapping it in a preempt_enable/disable section. Currently
sleeping is allowed in ->signaled, which the radeon implementation
here does. I think it would be reasonable to forbid this and drop
__radeon_fence_signaled.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/