On 2018年11月15日 19:12, Christian König wrote:
Implement finding the right timeline point in drm_syncobj_find_fence.
Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
index 589d884ccd58..d42c51520da4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
@@ -307,9 +307,17 @@ int drm_syncobj_find_fence(struct drm_file *file_private,
return -ENOENT;
*fence = drm_syncobj_fence_get(syncobj);
- if (!*fence) {
+ if (!*fence)
ret = -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!ret && point) {
+ dma_fence_chain_for_each(*fence) {
+ if (!to_dma_fence_chain(*fence) ||
+ (*fence)->seqno <= point)
+ break;
This condition isn't enough to find proper point.
For two examples:
a. No garbage collection happens, the points in chain are
1----3----6----9----12---18---20, if user wants to get point17, then we
should return node 18.
b. garbage collection happens on point6, chain would be updated to
1---3---9---12---18---20, if user wants to get point5, then we should
return node 3, but if user wants to get point 7, then we should return
node 9.
I still have no idea how to satisfy all these requirements with your
current chain-fence. All these logic just are same we encountered
before, we're walking them again. After solving these problems, I guess
all design is similar as before.
In fact, I don't know what problem previous design has, maybe there are
some bugs, can't we fix these bugs by time going? Who can make sure his
implementation never have bugs?
-David
+ }
}
+
drm_syncobj_put(syncobj);
return ret;
}
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
