From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: make waiting trace events more useful
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 23:56:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120502215619.GG4101@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120502213615.GE4101@phenom.ffwll.local>
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 11:36:15PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 10:22:33PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 May 2012 23:12:36 +0200, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > For consistency I guess we can ditch the dev parameter (and even then, the
> > > ring would uniquely identify the device). Also, I guess you need to
> > > explicitly pass in blocking, because mutex_is_locked is rather racy -
> > > someone else could hold the mutex while we're waiting in a non-blocking
> > > fashion.
> >
> > Meh, I suggested the race - I'd rather have a moment of confusion
> > reading the trace than reading the code in 6 months time.
>
> Ok, I see the problem and agree, let's have it slightly racy ...
I've forgotten to add: Ben, please add the reasons why we decided to go
with the racy variant to the commit messages, that kind of stuff is really
important (otherwise the patch simply looks buggy).
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-02 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-29 22:22 [PATCH 0/5 v3] timed BO wait Ben Widawsky
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH 1/5 v2] drm/i915: timeout parameter for seqno wait Ben Widawsky
2012-05-01 1:39 ` [PATCH 1/5] " Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 21:47 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-05-03 4:32 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: make waiting trace events more useful Ben Widawsky
2012-05-01 1:40 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 21:12 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-05-02 21:22 ` Chris Wilson
2012-05-02 21:36 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-05-02 21:56 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH 3/5 v2] drm/i915: extract some common olr+wedge code Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 21:08 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH 4/5 v3] drm/i915: wait render timeout ioctl Ben Widawsky
2012-05-01 1:41 ` [PATCH 4/5] " Ben Widawsky
2012-05-01 17:19 ` Eric Anholt
2012-05-01 18:08 ` Ben Widawsky
2012-05-02 21:26 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH 5/5] drm/i915: s/i915_wait_reqest/i915_wait_seqno/g Ben Widawsky
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH] intel: add a timed wait function Ben Widawsky
2012-04-29 22:22 ` [PATCH] tests/wait render timeout test Ben Widawsky
2012-05-03 5:49 ` [PATCH 0/5 v3] timed BO wait Ben Widawsky
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120502215619.GG4101@phenom.ffwll.local \
--to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=ben@bwidawsk.net \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.