Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Truly bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits

2019-05-14 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-05-14 09:04:39) > In commit b7404c7ecb38 ("drm/i915: Bump ready tasks ahead of > busywaits"), I tried cutting a corner in order to not install a signal > for each of our dependencies, and only listened to requests on which we > were intending to busywait. The compromise t

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Truly bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits

2019-05-14 Thread Chris Wilson
In commit b7404c7ecb38 ("drm/i915: Bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits"), I tried cutting a corner in order to not install a signal for each of our dependencies, and only listened to requests on which we were intending to busywait. The compromise that was made was that instead of then being able to

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Truly bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits

2019-05-10 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-05-09 21:51:54) > In commit b7404c7ecb38 ("drm/i915: Bump ready tasks ahead of > busywaits"), I tried cutting a corner in order to not install a signal > for each of our dependencies, and only listened to requests on which we > were intending to busywait. The compromise t

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Truly bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits

2019-05-09 Thread Chris Wilson
In commit b7404c7ecb38 ("drm/i915: Bump ready tasks ahead of busywaits"), I tried cutting a corner in order to not install a signal for each of our dependencies, and only listened to requests on which we were intending to busywait. The compromise that was made was that instead of then being able to