All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: "Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:23:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YUSWzm+TjD7GHHO5@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210917123513.1106-2-christian.koenig@amd.com>

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 02:34:48PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> Abstract the complexity of iterating over all the fences
> in a dma_resv object.
> 
> The new loop handles the whole RCU and retry dance and
> returns only fences where we can be sure we grabbed the
> right one.
> 
> v2: fix accessing the shared fences while they might be freed,
>     improve kerneldoc, rename _cursor to _iter, add
>     dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive, add dma_resv_iter_begin/end
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/dma-resv.h   | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 145 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> index 84fbe60629e3..3e77cad2c9d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> @@ -323,6 +323,67 @@ void dma_resv_add_excl_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_resv_add_excl_fence);
>  
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked - walk over fences in a dma_resv obj
> + * @cursor: cursor to record the current position
> + * @first: if we should start over
> + *
> + * Return all the fences in the dma_resv object which are not yet signaled.
> + * The returned fence has an extra local reference so will stay alive.
> + * If a concurrent modify is detected the whole iterration is started over again.
> + */
> +struct dma_fence *dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,

Bit ocd, but I'd still just call that iter_next.

> +					      bool first)

Hm I'd put all the init code into iter_begin ...

> +{
> +	struct dma_resv *obj = cursor->obj;

Aren't we missing rcu_read_lock() around the entire thing here?

> +
> +	first |= read_seqcount_retry(&obj->seq, cursor->seq);
> +	do {
> +		/* Drop the reference from the previous round */
> +		dma_fence_put(cursor->fence);
> +
> +		cursor->is_first = first;
> +		if (first) {
> +			cursor->seq = read_seqcount_begin(&obj->seq);
> +			cursor->index = -1;
> +			cursor->fences = dma_resv_shared_list(obj);

And then also call iter_begin from here. That way we guarantee that
read_seqcount_begin is always called before _retry(). It's not a problem
with the seqcount implementation (I think at least), but it definitely
looks funny.

Calling iter_begin here also makes it clear that we're essentially
restarting.

> +
> +			cursor->fence = dma_resv_excl_fence(obj);
> +			if (cursor->fence &&
> +			    test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,

Please use the right dma_fence wrapper here for this and don't look at the
bits/flags outside of dma_fence.[hc] code. I just realized that we don't
have the right amount of barriers in there for the fastpath, i.e. if we
have:

x = 0; /* static initializer */

thread a
	x = 1;
	dma_fence_signal(fence);


thread b;
	if (dma_fence_is_signalled(fence))
		printk("%i\n", x);

Then you might actually be able to observe x == 0 in thread b. Which is
not what we want at all.

So no open-coding of dma_fence flag bits code outside of drm_fence.[hc]
please. And yes i915-gem code is unfortunately a disaster.

> +				     &cursor->fence->flags))
> +				cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		} else {
> +			cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		}
> +
> +		if (cursor->fence) {
> +			cursor->fence = dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);
> +		} else if (cursor->all_fences && cursor->fences) {
> +			struct dma_resv_list *fences = cursor->fences;
> +
> +			while (++cursor->index < fences->shared_count) {
> +				cursor->fence = rcu_dereference(
> +					fences->shared[cursor->index]);
> +				if (!test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,
> +					      &cursor->fence->flags))
> +					break;
> +			}
> +			if (cursor->index < fences->shared_count)
> +				cursor->fence =
> +					dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);
> +			else
> +				cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		}

The control flow here is very hairy, but I'm not sure how to best do this.
With my suggestion to move the read_seqcount_begin into iter_begin maybe
something like this:

iter_next()
{
	do {
		dma_fence_put(cursor->fence)
		cursor->fence = NULL;

		if (cursor->index == -1) { /* reset by iter_begin()
			cursor->fence = get_exclusive();
			cusor->index++;
		} else {
			cursor->fence = shared_fences[++cursor->index]
		}

		if (!dma_fence_is_signalled(cursor->fence))
			continue; /* just grab the next fence. */

		cursor->fence =  dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);

		if (!cursor->fence || read_seqcount_retry()) {
			/* we lost the race, restart completely */
			iter_begin(); /* ->fence will be cleaned up at beginning of the loop */
			continue;
		}

		return cursor->fence;
	} while (true);
}

Maybe I missed something, but that avoids the duplication of all the
tricky code, i.e. checking for signalling, rcu protected conditional
fence_get, and the retry is also nicely at the end.
> +
> +		/* For the eventually next round */
> +		first = true;
> +	} while (read_seqcount_retry(&obj->seq, cursor->seq));
> +
> +	return cursor->fence;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked);
> +
>  /**
>   * dma_resv_copy_fences - Copy all fences from src to dst.
>   * @dst: the destination reservation object
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-resv.h b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> index 9100dd3dc21f..693d16117153 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,90 @@ struct dma_resv {
>  	struct dma_resv_list __rcu *fence;
>  };
>  
> +/**
> + * struct dma_resv_iter - current position into the dma_resv fences
> + *
> + * Don't touch this directly in the driver, use the accessor function instead.
> + */
> +struct dma_resv_iter {
> +	/** @obj: The dma_resv object we iterate over */
> +	struct dma_resv *obj;
> +
> +	/** @all_fences: If all fences should be returned */
> +	bool all_fences;
> +
> +	/** @fence: the currently handled fence */
> +	struct dma_fence *fence;
> +
> +	/** @seq: sequence number to check for modifications */
> +	unsigned int seq;
> +
> +	/** @index: index into the shared fences */

If you go with my suggestion (assuming it works): Please add "-1 indicates
to pick the exclusive fence instead."

> +	unsigned int index;
> +
> +	/** @fences: the shared fences */
> +	struct dma_resv_list *fences;
> +
> +	/** @is_first: true if this is the first returned fence */
> +	bool is_first;

I think if we just rely on -1 == exclusive fence/is_first we don't need
this one here?

> +};
> +
> +struct dma_fence *dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,
> +					      bool first);
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_begin - initialize a dma_resv_iter object
> + * @cursor: The dma_resv_iter object to initialize
> + * @obj: The dma_resv object which we want to iterator over
> + * @all_fences: If all fences should be returned or just the exclusive one

Please add: "Callers must clean up the iterator with dma_resv_iter_end()."

> + */
> +static inline void dma_resv_iter_begin(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,
> +					struct dma_resv *obj,
> +					bool all_fences)
> +{
> +	cursor->obj = obj;
> +	cursor->all_fences = all_fences;
> +	cursor->fence = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_end - cleanup a dma_resv_iter object
> + * @cursor: the dma_resv_iter object which should be cleaned up
> + *
> + * Make sure that the reference to the fence in the cursor is properly
> + * dropped.

Please add:

"This function must be called every time dma_resv_iter_begin() was called
to clean up any references."
> + */
> +static inline void dma_resv_iter_end(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor)
> +{
> +	dma_fence_put(cursor->fence);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive - test if the current fence is the exclusive one
> + * @cursor: the cursor of the current position
> + *
> + * Returns true if the currently returned fence is the exclusive one.
> + */
> +static inline bool dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor)
> +{
> +	return cursor->index == -1;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked - unlocked fence iterator
> + * @cursor: a struct dma_resv_iter pointer
> + * @fence: the current fence
> + *
> + * Iterate over the fences in a struct dma_resv object without holding the
> + * dma_resv::lock. The RCU read side lock must be hold when using this, but can
> + * be dropped and re-taken as necessary inside the loop. The cursor needs to be
> + * initialized with dma_resv_iter_begin_unlocked() and cleaned up with

We don't have an _unlocked version?

> + * dma_resv_iter_end_unlocked().
> + */
> +#define dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked(cursor, fence)			\
> +	for (fence = dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(cursor, true);		\
> +	     fence; fence = dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(cursor, false))
> +
>  #define dma_resv_held(obj) lockdep_is_held(&(obj)->lock.base)
>  #define dma_resv_assert_held(obj) lockdep_assert_held(&(obj)->lock.base)
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: "Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	daniel@ffwll.ch
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 15:23:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YUSWzm+TjD7GHHO5@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210917123513.1106-2-christian.koenig@amd.com>

On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 02:34:48PM +0200, Christian König wrote:
> Abstract the complexity of iterating over all the fences
> in a dma_resv object.
> 
> The new loop handles the whole RCU and retry dance and
> returns only fences where we can be sure we grabbed the
> right one.
> 
> v2: fix accessing the shared fences while they might be freed,
>     improve kerneldoc, rename _cursor to _iter, add
>     dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive, add dma_resv_iter_begin/end
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/dma-resv.h   | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 145 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> index 84fbe60629e3..3e77cad2c9d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c
> @@ -323,6 +323,67 @@ void dma_resv_add_excl_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_resv_add_excl_fence);
>  
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked - walk over fences in a dma_resv obj
> + * @cursor: cursor to record the current position
> + * @first: if we should start over
> + *
> + * Return all the fences in the dma_resv object which are not yet signaled.
> + * The returned fence has an extra local reference so will stay alive.
> + * If a concurrent modify is detected the whole iterration is started over again.
> + */
> +struct dma_fence *dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,

Bit ocd, but I'd still just call that iter_next.

> +					      bool first)

Hm I'd put all the init code into iter_begin ...

> +{
> +	struct dma_resv *obj = cursor->obj;

Aren't we missing rcu_read_lock() around the entire thing here?

> +
> +	first |= read_seqcount_retry(&obj->seq, cursor->seq);
> +	do {
> +		/* Drop the reference from the previous round */
> +		dma_fence_put(cursor->fence);
> +
> +		cursor->is_first = first;
> +		if (first) {
> +			cursor->seq = read_seqcount_begin(&obj->seq);
> +			cursor->index = -1;
> +			cursor->fences = dma_resv_shared_list(obj);

And then also call iter_begin from here. That way we guarantee that
read_seqcount_begin is always called before _retry(). It's not a problem
with the seqcount implementation (I think at least), but it definitely
looks funny.

Calling iter_begin here also makes it clear that we're essentially
restarting.

> +
> +			cursor->fence = dma_resv_excl_fence(obj);
> +			if (cursor->fence &&
> +			    test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,

Please use the right dma_fence wrapper here for this and don't look at the
bits/flags outside of dma_fence.[hc] code. I just realized that we don't
have the right amount of barriers in there for the fastpath, i.e. if we
have:

x = 0; /* static initializer */

thread a
	x = 1;
	dma_fence_signal(fence);


thread b;
	if (dma_fence_is_signalled(fence))
		printk("%i\n", x);

Then you might actually be able to observe x == 0 in thread b. Which is
not what we want at all.

So no open-coding of dma_fence flag bits code outside of drm_fence.[hc]
please. And yes i915-gem code is unfortunately a disaster.

> +				     &cursor->fence->flags))
> +				cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		} else {
> +			cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		}
> +
> +		if (cursor->fence) {
> +			cursor->fence = dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);
> +		} else if (cursor->all_fences && cursor->fences) {
> +			struct dma_resv_list *fences = cursor->fences;
> +
> +			while (++cursor->index < fences->shared_count) {
> +				cursor->fence = rcu_dereference(
> +					fences->shared[cursor->index]);
> +				if (!test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,
> +					      &cursor->fence->flags))
> +					break;
> +			}
> +			if (cursor->index < fences->shared_count)
> +				cursor->fence =
> +					dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);
> +			else
> +				cursor->fence = NULL;
> +		}

The control flow here is very hairy, but I'm not sure how to best do this.
With my suggestion to move the read_seqcount_begin into iter_begin maybe
something like this:

iter_next()
{
	do {
		dma_fence_put(cursor->fence)
		cursor->fence = NULL;

		if (cursor->index == -1) { /* reset by iter_begin()
			cursor->fence = get_exclusive();
			cusor->index++;
		} else {
			cursor->fence = shared_fences[++cursor->index]
		}

		if (!dma_fence_is_signalled(cursor->fence))
			continue; /* just grab the next fence. */

		cursor->fence =  dma_fence_get_rcu(cursor->fence);

		if (!cursor->fence || read_seqcount_retry()) {
			/* we lost the race, restart completely */
			iter_begin(); /* ->fence will be cleaned up at beginning of the loop */
			continue;
		}

		return cursor->fence;
	} while (true);
}

Maybe I missed something, but that avoids the duplication of all the
tricky code, i.e. checking for signalling, rcu protected conditional
fence_get, and the retry is also nicely at the end.
> +
> +		/* For the eventually next round */
> +		first = true;
> +	} while (read_seqcount_retry(&obj->seq, cursor->seq));
> +
> +	return cursor->fence;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked);
> +
>  /**
>   * dma_resv_copy_fences - Copy all fences from src to dst.
>   * @dst: the destination reservation object
> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-resv.h b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> index 9100dd3dc21f..693d16117153 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,90 @@ struct dma_resv {
>  	struct dma_resv_list __rcu *fence;
>  };
>  
> +/**
> + * struct dma_resv_iter - current position into the dma_resv fences
> + *
> + * Don't touch this directly in the driver, use the accessor function instead.
> + */
> +struct dma_resv_iter {
> +	/** @obj: The dma_resv object we iterate over */
> +	struct dma_resv *obj;
> +
> +	/** @all_fences: If all fences should be returned */
> +	bool all_fences;
> +
> +	/** @fence: the currently handled fence */
> +	struct dma_fence *fence;
> +
> +	/** @seq: sequence number to check for modifications */
> +	unsigned int seq;
> +
> +	/** @index: index into the shared fences */

If you go with my suggestion (assuming it works): Please add "-1 indicates
to pick the exclusive fence instead."

> +	unsigned int index;
> +
> +	/** @fences: the shared fences */
> +	struct dma_resv_list *fences;
> +
> +	/** @is_first: true if this is the first returned fence */
> +	bool is_first;

I think if we just rely on -1 == exclusive fence/is_first we don't need
this one here?

> +};
> +
> +struct dma_fence *dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,
> +					      bool first);
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_begin - initialize a dma_resv_iter object
> + * @cursor: The dma_resv_iter object to initialize
> + * @obj: The dma_resv object which we want to iterator over
> + * @all_fences: If all fences should be returned or just the exclusive one

Please add: "Callers must clean up the iterator with dma_resv_iter_end()."

> + */
> +static inline void dma_resv_iter_begin(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor,
> +					struct dma_resv *obj,
> +					bool all_fences)
> +{
> +	cursor->obj = obj;
> +	cursor->all_fences = all_fences;
> +	cursor->fence = NULL;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_end - cleanup a dma_resv_iter object
> + * @cursor: the dma_resv_iter object which should be cleaned up
> + *
> + * Make sure that the reference to the fence in the cursor is properly
> + * dropped.

Please add:

"This function must be called every time dma_resv_iter_begin() was called
to clean up any references."
> + */
> +static inline void dma_resv_iter_end(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor)
> +{
> +	dma_fence_put(cursor->fence);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive - test if the current fence is the exclusive one
> + * @cursor: the cursor of the current position
> + *
> + * Returns true if the currently returned fence is the exclusive one.
> + */
> +static inline bool dma_resv_iter_is_exclusive(struct dma_resv_iter *cursor)
> +{
> +	return cursor->index == -1;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked - unlocked fence iterator
> + * @cursor: a struct dma_resv_iter pointer
> + * @fence: the current fence
> + *
> + * Iterate over the fences in a struct dma_resv object without holding the
> + * dma_resv::lock. The RCU read side lock must be hold when using this, but can
> + * be dropped and re-taken as necessary inside the loop. The cursor needs to be
> + * initialized with dma_resv_iter_begin_unlocked() and cleaned up with

We don't have an _unlocked version?

> + * dma_resv_iter_end_unlocked().
> + */
> +#define dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked(cursor, fence)			\
> +	for (fence = dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(cursor, true);		\
> +	     fence; fence = dma_resv_iter_walk_unlocked(cursor, false))
> +
>  #define dma_resv_held(obj) lockdep_is_held(&(obj)->lock.base)
>  #define dma_resv_assert_held(obj) lockdep_assert_held(&(obj)->lock.base)
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-17 13:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 116+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-17 12:34 Deploying new iterator interface for dma-buf Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 13:23   ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-09-17 13:23     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-20  8:43     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-20 10:09       ` Christian König
2021-09-20 10:26         ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 02/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 13:27   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 13:27     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:30     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:30       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 03/26] dma-buf: use new iterator in dma_resv_copy_fences Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:35   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:35     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-20  7:23     ` Christian König
2021-09-20  7:23       ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 04/26] dma-buf: use new iterator in dma_resv_get_fences v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:39   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:39     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 05/26] dma-buf: use new iterator in dma_resv_wait_timeout Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:43   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:43     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-20  7:27     ` Christian König
2021-09-20  7:27       ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 06/26] dma-buf: use new iterator in dma_resv_test_signaled Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:45   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:45     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 07/26] drm/ttm: use the new iterator in ttm_bo_flush_all_fences Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:50   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:50     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 08/26] drm/amdgpu: use the new iterator in amdgpu_sync_resv Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 09/26] drm/amdgpu: use new iterator in amdgpu_ttm_bo_eviction_valuable Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 10/26] drm/msm: use new iterator in msm_gem_describe Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 11/26] drm/radeon: use new iterator in radeon_sync_resv Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34 ` [PATCH 12/26] drm/scheduler: use new iterator in drm_sched_job_add_implicit_dependencies v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:34   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:52   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:52     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-11-15 14:03   ` Sascha Hauer
2021-11-15 14:03     ` Sascha Hauer
2021-11-15 14:03     ` [Intel-gfx] " Sascha Hauer
2021-11-15 14:08     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-11-15 14:08       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-11-15 14:08       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-11-15 20:32       ` Christian König
2021-11-15 20:32         ` Christian König
2021-11-15 20:32         ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-11-16  7:56       ` Sascha Hauer
2021-11-16  7:56         ` [Intel-gfx] " Sascha Hauer
2021-11-16  7:56         ` Sascha Hauer
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 13/26] drm/i915: use the new iterator in i915_gem_busy_ioctl Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-20  8:45   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-20 10:13     ` Christian König
2021-09-20 10:33       ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-21  9:41         ` Christian König
2021-09-21 13:10           ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 14/26] drm/i915: use the new iterator in i915_sw_fence_await_reservation v3 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-20  8:45   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-20  8:47     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-20 10:14       ` Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 15/26] drm/i915: use the new iterator in i915_request_await_object v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 16/26] drm/i915: use new iterator in i915_gem_object_wait_reservation v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-20 10:00   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-09-21 17:35     ` Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 17/26] drm/i915: use new iterator in i915_gem_object_wait_priority v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 18/26] drm/i915: use new iterator in i915_gem_object_last_write_engine v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 19/26] drm/i915: use new cursor in intel_prepare_plane_fb v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 20/26] drm: use new iterator in drm_gem_fence_array_add_implicit v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:53   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:53     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-20  7:31     ` Christian König
2021-09-20  7:31       ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 21/26] drm: use new iterator in drm_gem_plane_helper_prepare_fb v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:55   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:55     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-20  7:35     ` Christian König
2021-09-20  7:35       ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 22/26] drm/nouveau: use the new iterator in nouveau_fence_sync Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 23/26] drm/nouveau: use the new interator in nv50_wndw_prepare_fb v2 Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 24/26] drm/etnaviv: use new iterator in etnaviv_gem_describe Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 25/26] drm/etnaviv: replace dma_resv_get_excl_unlocked Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35 ` [PATCH 26/26] dma-buf: nuke dma_resv_get_excl_unlocked Christian König
2021-09-17 12:35   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-09-17 14:56   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:56     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-09-17 14:01 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for series starting with [01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2 Patchwork
2021-09-17 14:29 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-09-17 15:43 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-16 11:30 Deploying new iterator interface for dma-buf Christian König
2021-09-16 11:30 ` [PATCH 01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2 Christian König
2021-09-16 12:15   ` 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=YUSWzm+TjD7GHHO5@phenom.ffwll.local \
    --to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 01/26] dma-buf: add dma_resv_for_each_fence_unlocked v2' \
    /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

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.