From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] drm/i915: Cleanup handling of
 last_fenced_seqno
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:55:11 +0100
Message-ID: <20110319225510.GD16343@viiv.ffwll.ch>
References: <1300487719-26578-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<1300487719-26578-4-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail.ffwll.ch (cable-static-216-94.intergga.ch [87.102.216.94])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B18AC9E77E
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Sat, 19 Mar 2011 15:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1300487719-26578-4-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

A few nitpicks below.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 5201f82..2dbf8f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -2461,13 +2461,15 @@ i915_gem_object_flush_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
>  		obj->fenced_gpu_access = false;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (obj->last_fenced_seqno &&
> +	    ring_passed_seqno(obj->ring, obj->last_fenced_seqno))
> +		obj->last_fenced_seqno = 0;

This only avoids running the request retiring logic. Without this there are a
few more things to simplify, I think:

>  	if (obj->last_fenced_seqno && pipelined != obj->ring) {
> -		if (!ring_passed_seqno(obj->ring, obj->last_fenced_seqno)) {
> -			ret = i915_wait_request(obj->ring,
> -						obj->last_fenced_seqno);
> -			if (ret)
> -				return ret;
> -		}
> +		ret = i915_wait_request(obj->ring,
> +					obj->last_fenced_seqno);
> +		if (ret)
> +			return ret;
>  
>  		obj->last_fenced_seqno = 0;

Can't we move that (and the other copies) to move_off_active?

> @@ -2648,15 +2650,18 @@ i915_gem_object_get_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
>  						       old->last_fenced_seqno);
>  		}

Above here is the imo unnecessary clause mentioned in a previous patch.

>  
> +		obj->last_fenced_seqno = old->last_fenced_seqno;
>  		drm_gem_object_unreference(&old->base);
> -	} else if (obj->last_fenced_seqno == 0)
> -		pipelined = NULL;
> +	}
>  
>  	reg->obj = obj;
>  	list_move_tail(&reg->lru_list, &dev_priv->mm.fence_list);
>  	obj->fence_reg = reg - dev_priv->fence_regs;
>  
>  update:
> +	if (obj->last_fenced_seqno == 0)
> +		pipelined = NULL;
> +
>  	reg->setup_seqno =
>  		pipelined ? i915_gem_next_request_seqno(pipelined) : 0;
>  	reg->setup_ring = pipelined;
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48