RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step

2021-06-17 Thread Tang, CQ
> -Original Message- > From: Intel-gfx On Behalf Of > Thomas Hellström > Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 4:36 AM > To: intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Thomas Hellström ; Auld, Matthew > > Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step

2021-06-17 Thread Maarten Lankhorst
Op 15-06-2021 om 13:36 schreef Thomas Hellström: > To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're > processing, perform locking as a separate step. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström > --- > .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c| 25 --- > 1 file

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step

2021-06-17 Thread Thomas Hellström
On 6/17/21 11:56 AM, Ramalingam C wrote: On 2021-06-15 at 13:36:00 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote: To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're processing, perform locking as a separate step. Looks reasonable to me. Reviewed-by: Ramalingam C Thanks for reviewing!

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step

2021-06-17 Thread Ramalingam C
On 2021-06-15 at 13:36:00 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote: > To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're > processing, perform locking as a separate step. > Looks reasonable to me. Reviewed-by: Ramalingam C > Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström > --- >

[PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step

2021-06-15 Thread Thomas Hellström
To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're processing, perform locking as a separate step. Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström --- .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c| 25 --- 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git