On 15/03/2017 14:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
Check that signaled bit on the request->fence before acquiring a
"is not set" ^
Or "Check that the request has not been signalled before.." ?
reference to the request for signaling later in the interrupt handler.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
index 31f0d7c8992f..e646c4eba65d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
@@ -1056,7 +1056,9 @@ static void notify_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
* and many waiters.
*/
if (i915_seqno_passed(intel_engine_get_seqno(engine),
- wait->seqno))
+ wait->seqno) &&
+ !test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_SIGNALED_BIT,
+ &wait->request->fence.flags))
rq = i915_gem_request_get(wait->request);
wake_up_process(wait->tsk);
Is this just to optimize things slightly? Does it happen sufficiently
often for it to be worth it?
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
