* Mario Kleiner | 2013-09-26 18:16:47 [+0200]:
Good! I will do that. Thanks for clarifying the irq and constraints
on raw locks in the other thread.
Are there any suggestions for now? preempt_disable_nort() like Luis
suggesed?
-mario
Sebastian
___
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:18:00 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Mario Kleiner | 2013-09-26 18:16:47 [+0200]:
Good! I will do that. Thanks for clarifying the irq and constraints
on raw locks in the other thread.
Are there any suggestions for now?
On 10/11/2013 02:37 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:18:00 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Mario Kleiner | 2013-09-26 18:16:47 [+0200]:
Good! I will do that. Thanks for clarifying the irq and constraints
on raw locks in the other thread.
Are
On 10/11/2013 03:30 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 10/11/2013 02:37 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:18:00 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Mario Kleiner | 2013-09-26 18:16:47 [+0200]:
Good! I will do that. Thanks for clarifying the irq
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 15:30:22 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
On 10/11/2013 02:37 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:18:00 +0200
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior bige...@linutronix.de wrote:
* Mario Kleiner | 2013-09-26 18:16:47 [+0200]:
Good! I
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 06:32:10 +0200
Mario Kleiner mario.klei...@tuebingen.mpg.de wrote:
I assume if a spin_lock_irqsave doesn't really disable interrupts on a
RT kernel with normal spinlocks then local_irq_disable won't really
disable interrupts either?
That is incorrect. On PREEMPT_RT,
Sorry for the late reply, I was at Linux Plumbers, and had a bunch of
stuff to catch up on when I returned.
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 00:07:36 +0200
Mario Kleiner mario.klei...@tuebingen.mpg.de wrote:
Steven, would it then be acceptable to convert that faster lock into a
raw_spinlock_t or is
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 10:49:36 +0300
Ville Syrjälä ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
The preempt_disable/enable is not needed. The spinlock serves the same
purpose already.
As stated, that was only for the -rt patch, as spin_lock_irqsave does
not disable preemption nor does it even disable
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 06:32:10 +0200
Mario Kleiner mario.klei...@tuebingen.mpg.de wrote:
But given the new situation, your proposal is great! If we push the
clock readouts into the get_scanoutpos routine, we can make this robust
without causing grief for the rt people and without the need
On 25.09.13 16:13, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 06:32:10 +0200
Mario Kleiner mario.klei...@tuebingen.mpg.de wrote:
But given the new situation, your proposal is great! If we push the
clock readouts into the get_scanoutpos routine, we can make this robust
without causing grief for
On 25.09.13 09:49, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:32:10AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 23.09.13 10:38, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:07:36AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter
On 23.09.13 10:38, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:07:36AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 06:32:10AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 23.09.13 10:38, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:07:36AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com
wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:16:43 -0400
Peter Hurley
On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 12:07:36AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote:
On 09/17/2013 10:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com
wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:52:07PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
On 09/17/2013 04:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com
wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
Ouch. But thanks for clarifying that.
Ok, so register access needs to be serialized. And a separate but
related concern is that gen6+ resets also need to hold-off register
access where forcewake is required.
On 09/17/2013 04:55 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:16:43 -0400
Peter Hurley
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:16:43 -0400
Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
The funny part is, there's a comment there that shows that this was
done even for PREEMPT_RT.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:50 PM, Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
On 09/11/2013 03:31 PM, Peter Hurley wrote:
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:16:43 -0400
Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
The funny part is,
[+cc dri-devel]
On 09/11/2013 11:38 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:16:43 -0400
Peter Hurley pe...@hurleysoftware.com wrote:
The funny part is, there's a comment there that shows that this was
done even for PREEMPT_RT. Unfortunately, the call to
get_scanout_position() can
21 matches
Mail list logo
