From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: fixup seqno allocation logic for lazy_request
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 14:55:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120126135539.GK3896@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f80fcd$39gkho@fmsmga001.fm.intel.com>
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 03:46:51PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> The actual refactoring patch are also ok, though I'd like for Daniel
> to scope out who owns the seqno vs the request, especially in the light
> of no-more-domains...
I've thought a bit more about this and one great upside of seqnos over a
simple pointer to the request is that we'd need to properly manage
references to the latter. I.e. when we free a request we would need to
ensure that anyone still referencing it is actually gone, and the current
code is unfortunately quite far away from that :(
I think we should keep this refactor idea in mind and look at it again
after no-more-domains and after intel_ringbuffer.c has been simplified.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-26 13:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-25 13:03 [PATCH 1/4] drm/i915: outstanding_lazy_request is a u32 Daniel Vetter
2012-01-25 13:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] drm/i915: fixup seqno allocation logic for lazy_request Daniel Vetter
2012-01-25 14:17 ` Chris Wilson
2012-01-25 15:32 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2012-01-25 15:46 ` Chris Wilson
2012-01-26 13:55 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2012-01-25 13:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: adjust ring->add_request to no longer pass back the seqno Daniel Vetter
2012-01-25 15:33 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2012-01-25 13:04 ` [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: enable forcewake voodoo also for gen6 Daniel Vetter
2012-01-30 22:33 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-02-08 10:00 ` Chris Wilson
2012-02-13 10:00 ` Daniel Vetter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120126135539.GK3896@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.