On 01/11/2016 11:03 AM, John Harrison wrote: > On 08/01/2016 21:59, Chris Wilson wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 06:47:22PM +0000, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: >>> From: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com> >>> >>> There is a construct in the linux kernel called 'struct fence' that is >>> intended to keep track of work that is executed on hardware. I.e. it >>> solves the basic problem that the drivers 'struct >>> drm_i915_gem_request' is trying to address. The request structure does >>> quite a lot more than simply track the execution progress so is very >>> definitely still required. However, the basic completion status side >>> could be updated to use the ready made fence implementation and gain >>> all the advantages that provides. >>> >>> This patch makes the first step of integrating a struct fence into the >>> request. It replaces the explicit reference count with that of the >>> fence. It also replaces the 'is completed' test with the fence's >>> equivalent. Currently, that simply chains on to the original request >>> implementation. A future patch will improve this. >> But this forces everyone to do the heavyweight polling until the request >> is completed? > Not sure what you mean by heavy weight polling. And as described, this is > only an intermediate step.
Just the lazy_coherency removal maybe? Chris? Jesse _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
