On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:02:01PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:14:54PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > We only need a very lightweight mechanism here as the locking is only
> > used for co-ordinating a bitfield.
> >
> > v2: Move the cheap unlikely tests into the caller
On ke, 2016-07-27 at 12:14 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> /* Delay flushing when rings are still busy.*/
> - mutex_lock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> + spin_lock(&dev_priv->fb_tracking.lock);
> frontbuffer_bits &= ~dev_priv->fb_tracking.busy_bits;
> - mutex_unlock(&dev_pr
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 12:02:01PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:14:54PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > We only need a very lightweight mechanism here as the locking is only
> > used for co-ordinating a bitfield.
> >
> > v2: Move the cheap unlikely tests into the caller
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:14:54PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> We only need a very lightweight mechanism here as the locking is only
> used for co-ordinating a bitfield.
>
> v2: Move the cheap unlikely tests into the caller
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
I think the code shuffling in here bad
We only need a very lightweight mechanism here as the locking is only
used for co-ordinating a bitfield.
v2: Move the cheap unlikely tests into the caller
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 +-
drivers/
