2011/11/17 Alex Deucher <alexdeucher at gmail.com>: > 2011/11/17 Christian K?nig <deathsimple at vodafone.de>: >> On 16.11.2011 01:24, Jerome Glisse wrote: >>> >>> Well as we don't specify on which value semaphore should wait on, i am >>> prety sure the first ring to increment the semaphore will unblock all >>> waiter. So if you have ring1 that want to wait on ring2 and ring3 as soon as >>> ring2 or ring3 is done ring1 will go one while either ring2 or ring3 might >>> not be done. I will test that tomorrow but from doc i have it seems so. Thus >>> it will be broken with more than one ring, that would mean you have to >>> allocate one semaphore for each ring couple you want to synchronize. Note >>> that the usual case will likely be sync btw 2 ring. >> >> Good point, but I played with it a bit more today and it is just behaving as >> I thought it would be. A single signal command will just unblock a single >> waiter, even if there are multiple waiters currently for this semaphore, the >> only thing you can't tell is which waiter will come first. >> >> I should also note that the current algorithm will just emit multiple wait >> operations to a single ring, and spread the signal operations to all other >> rings we are interested in. That isn't very efficient, but should indeed >> work quite fine. >> >>> After retesting the first patch ?drm/radeon: fix debugfs handling is NAK >>> a complete no go. >>> >>> Issue is that radeon_debugfs_cleanup is call after rdev is free. This >>> is why i used a static array. I forgot about that, i should have put a >>> comment. I guess you built your kernel without debugfs or that you >>> didn't tested to reload the module. >> >> Mhm, I have tested it, seen the crash, and didn't thought that this is a >> problem. Don't ask me why I can't understand it myself right now. >> >> Anyway, I moved the unregistering of the files into a separate function, >> which is now called from radeon_device_fini instead of >> radeon_debugfs_cleanup. That seems to work fine, at least if I haven't >> missed something else. >> >> I also merged your indention fixes and the fix for the never allocated >> semaphores and pushed the result into my public repository >> (http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~deathsimple/linux), so please take another >> look at it. > > I've got a few other patches to enable further functionality in the > mring patches. > - per ring fence interrupts > - add some additional ring fields to better handle different ring types > > http://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/mrings/ >
FYI, I updated these later last night. Alex > Alex >
