On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM,  <j.gli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Jerome Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>
>
> We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
> fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
> memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
> enforce both of this constraint.
>
> v2: actually test build it
>
> Fix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906296
>
> Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>

Isn't that just another iteration of
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1972071/ which somehow never
reached -fixes?
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to