On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 2:59 AM Tvrtko Ursulin
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
>
> Use the previously added dma-fence tracking of explicit waiters.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> index 0c2be8360525..776b90774a64 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> @@ -1065,9 +1065,9 @@ static signed long
> drm_syncobj_array_wait_timeout(struct drm_syncobj **syncobjs,
> if ((flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_AVAILABLE) ||
> dma_fence_is_signaled(fence) ||
> (!entries[i].fence_cb.func &&
> - dma_fence_add_callback(fence,
> - &entries[i].fence_cb,
> -
> syncobj_wait_fence_func))) {
> + dma_fence_add_wait_callback(fence,
> + &entries[i].fence_cb,
> +
> syncobj_wait_fence_func))) {
I think this isn't really what you want if count > 1, because you
wouldn't be notifying the fence signaler of fence n+1 until the wait
on fence n completed
BR,
-R
> /* The fence has been signaled */
> if (flags & DRM_SYNCOBJ_WAIT_FLAGS_WAIT_ALL) {
> signaled_count++;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
