On ma, 2016-08-01 at 20:28 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 07:22:27PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >
> > The principal motivation for this was to try and eliminate the
> > struct_mutex from i915_gem_suspend - but we still need to hold the mutex
> > current for the
On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 07:22:27PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> The principal motivation for this was to try and eliminate the
> struct_mutex from i915_gem_suspend - but we still need to hold the mutex
> current for the i915_gem_context_lost(). (The issue there is that there
> may be an indirect
The principal motivation for this was to try and eliminate the
struct_mutex from i915_gem_suspend - but we still need to hold the mutex
current for the i915_gem_context_lost(). (The issue there is that there
may be an indirect lockdep cycle between cpu_hotplug (i.e. suspend) and
struct_mutex via
