* [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
@ 2016-11-16 15:27 Chris Wilson
2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2016-11-16 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx
Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
{
+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
struct intel_engine_cs *engine = NULL;
struct i915_dependency *dep, *p;
struct i915_dependency stack;
@@ -702,8 +703,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
if (prio <= READ_ONCE(request->priotree.priority))
return;
- /* Need BKL in order to use the temporary link inside i915_dependency */
- lockdep_assert_held(&request->i915->drm.struct_mutex);
+ /* Need global lock to use the temporary link inside i915_dependency */
+ mutex_lock(&lock);
stack.signaler = &request->priotree;
list_add(&stack.dfs_link, &dfs);
@@ -770,6 +771,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
if (engine)
spin_unlock_irq(&engine->timeline->lock);
+ mutex_unlock(&lock);
+
/* XXX Do we need to preempt to make room for us and our deps? */
}
--
2.10.2
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-16 15:27 [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access Chris Wilson
@ 2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-11-16 16:03 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-16 16:46 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
2016-11-17 9:16 ` [PATCH] " David Weinehall
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Tvrtko Ursulin @ 2016-11-16 15:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, intel-gfx
On 16/11/2016 15:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
>
> Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
Grumble grumble, sloppy review. :I
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> @@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
>
> static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> {
> + static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
Good enough for one GPU. :) Consider improving in the future as it is
not in the spirit of the driver.
> struct intel_engine_cs *engine = NULL;
> struct i915_dependency *dep, *p;
> struct i915_dependency stack;
> @@ -702,8 +703,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> if (prio <= READ_ONCE(request->priotree.priority))
> return;
>
> - /* Need BKL in order to use the temporary link inside i915_dependency */
> - lockdep_assert_held(&request->i915->drm.struct_mutex);
> + /* Need global lock to use the temporary link inside i915_dependency */
> + mutex_lock(&lock);
>
> stack.signaler = &request->priotree;
> list_add(&stack.dfs_link, &dfs);
> @@ -770,6 +771,8 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> if (engine)
> spin_unlock_irq(&engine->timeline->lock);
>
> + mutex_unlock(&lock);
> +
> /* XXX Do we need to preempt to make room for us and our deps? */
> }
>
>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2016-11-16 16:03 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-17 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2016-11-16 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tvrtko Ursulin; +Cc: intel-gfx
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:54:23PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 16/11/2016 15:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> >dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> >struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> >lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
> >
> >Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> >Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
>
> Grumble grumble, sloppy review. :I
Too busy living the good life with working atomic flips.
> >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> >---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> >index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
> >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> >@@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
> >
> > static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> > {
> >+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
>
> Good enough for one GPU. :) Consider improving in the future as it
> is not in the spirit of the driver.
Actually... Being able to PI across multiple GPUs is part of the dream.
In that case, it does need to be a global lock - just a bit iffy on
getting dependency tracking into a common layer.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-16 15:27 [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access Chris Wilson
2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
@ 2016-11-16 16:46 ` Patchwork
2016-11-17 9:16 ` [PATCH] " David Weinehall
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Patchwork @ 2016-11-16 16:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson; +Cc: intel-gfx
== Series Details ==
Series: drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/15425/
State : warning
== Summary ==
Series 15425v1 drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/15425/revisions/1/mbox/
Test drv_module_reload_basic:
pass -> DMESG-WARN (fi-skl-6770hq)
fi-bdw-5557u total:244 pass:229 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:15
fi-bsw-n3050 total:244 pass:204 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:40
fi-bxt-t5700 total:244 pass:216 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28
fi-byt-j1900 total:244 pass:216 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:28
fi-byt-n2820 total:244 pass:212 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:32
fi-hsw-4770 total:244 pass:224 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20
fi-hsw-4770r total:244 pass:224 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:20
fi-ilk-650 total:244 pass:191 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:53
fi-ivb-3520m total:244 pass:222 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:22
fi-ivb-3770 total:244 pass:222 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:22
fi-kbl-7200u total:244 pass:222 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:22
fi-skl-6260u total:244 pass:230 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:14
fi-skl-6700hq total:244 pass:223 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:21
fi-skl-6700k total:244 pass:222 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:21
fi-skl-6770hq total:244 pass:229 dwarn:1 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:14
fi-snb-2520m total:244 pass:212 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:32
fi-snb-2600 total:244 pass:211 dwarn:0 dfail:0 fail:0 skip:33
6294f67611ebe69006c0e85c372efadcac8e9d66 drm-intel-nightly: 2016y-11m-16d-09h-57m-25s UTC integration manifest
cf75a49 drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
== Logs ==
For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/CI/Patchwork_3025/
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-16 16:03 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2016-11-17 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-11-17 8:52 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2016-11-17 8:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Tvrtko Ursulin, intel-gfx
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:03:27PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:54:23PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >
> > On 16/11/2016 15:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > >Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> > >dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> > >struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> > >lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
> > >
> > >Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > >Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
> >
> > Grumble grumble, sloppy review. :I
>
> Too busy living the good life with working atomic flips.
>
> > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > >Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > >---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > >index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
> > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > >@@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
> > >
> > > static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> > > {
> > >+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
> >
> > Good enough for one GPU. :) Consider improving in the future as it
> > is not in the spirit of the driver.
>
> Actually... Being able to PI across multiple GPUs is part of the dream.
> In that case, it does need to be a global lock - just a bit iffy on
> getting dependency tracking into a common layer.
Why exactly does this need a global lock? And yes static mutex in a
function looks evil, pls move right next to the data.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-17 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
@ 2016-11-17 8:52 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-17 9:05 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2016-11-17 8:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 09:45:17AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:03:27PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:54:23PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > >
> > > On 16/11/2016 15:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > >Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> > > >dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> > > >struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> > > >lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
> > > >
> > > >Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > > >Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
> > >
> > > Grumble grumble, sloppy review. :I
> >
> > Too busy living the good life with working atomic flips.
> >
> > > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > > >Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > > >---
> > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > >index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
> > > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > >@@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
> > > >
> > > > static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> > > > {
> > > >+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
> > >
> > > Good enough for one GPU. :) Consider improving in the future as it
> > > is not in the spirit of the driver.
> >
> > Actually... Being able to PI across multiple GPUs is part of the dream.
> > In that case, it does need to be a global lock - just a bit iffy on
> > getting dependency tracking into a common layer.
>
> Why exactly does this need a global lock? And yes static mutex in a
> function looks evil, pls move right next to the data.
It is next to the data.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-17 8:52 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2016-11-17 9:05 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2016-11-17 9:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, Daniel Vetter, Tvrtko Ursulin, intel-gfx
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 08:52:59AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 09:45:17AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:03:27PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:54:23PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 16/11/2016 15:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > >Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> > > > >dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> > > > >struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> > > > >lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
> > > > >
> > > > >Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > > > >Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
> > > >
> > > > Grumble grumble, sloppy review. :I
> > >
> > > Too busy living the good life with working atomic flips.
> > >
> > > > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > > >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > > > >Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> > > > >---
> > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 7 +++++--
> > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > > >index e23b6a2600fb..10e59ff0d8f1 100644
> > > > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> > > > >@@ -694,6 +694,7 @@ pt_lock_engine(struct i915_priotree *pt, struct intel_engine_cs *locked)
> > > > >
> > > > > static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
> > > > > {
> > > > >+ static DEFINE_MUTEX(lock);
> > > >
> > > > Good enough for one GPU. :) Consider improving in the future as it
> > > > is not in the spirit of the driver.
> > >
> > > Actually... Being able to PI across multiple GPUs is part of the dream.
> > > In that case, it does need to be a global lock - just a bit iffy on
> > > getting dependency tracking into a common layer.
> >
> > Why exactly does this need a global lock? And yes static mutex in a
> > function looks evil, pls move right next to the data.
>
> It is next to the data.
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.h
index e2b077df2da0..c7c4c465adce 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.h
@@ -44,10 +44,13 @@ struct intel_signal_node {
struct intel_wait wait;
};
+extern struct mutex dfs_lock;
+
struct i915_dependency {
struct i915_priotree *signaler;
struct list_head signal_link;
struct list_head wait_link;
+ /* protected by dfs_lock */
struct list_head dfs_link;
unsigned long flags;
#define I915_DEPENDENCY_ALLOC BIT(0)
Or something like that. Or at least a note about this stuff.
Oh and broken record again: Any plans to kernel-doc all the fancy new
stuff (datastructures and interface functions), or is that not on the
plan?
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access
2016-11-16 15:27 [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access Chris Wilson
2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-11-16 16:46 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
@ 2016-11-17 9:16 ` David Weinehall
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Weinehall @ 2016-11-17 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson; +Cc: intel-gfx
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:27:21PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Avoid requiring struct_mutex for exclusive access to the temporary
> dfs_link inside the i915_dependency as not all callers may want to touch
> struct_mutex. So rather than force them to take a highly contended
> lock, introduce a local lock for the execlists schedule operation.
>
> Reported-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
> Fixes: 9a151987d709 ("drm/i915: Add execution priority boosting for mmioflips")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
I'll provide a retroactive:
Tested-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>
Seems to work fine; no flooded logs on my test machine with this patch.
Kind regards, David
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-11-17 9:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-11-16 15:27 [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a local lock for dfs_link access Chris Wilson
2016-11-16 15:54 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-11-16 16:03 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-17 8:45 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-11-17 8:52 ` Chris Wilson
2016-11-17 9:05 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-11-16 16:46 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for " Patchwork
2016-11-17 9:16 ` [PATCH] " David Weinehall
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.