From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] drm/i915: Remove the per-ring write list
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 11:05:51 +0200
Message-ID: <20120713090550.GB5721@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1342106019-17806-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<1342106019-17806-4-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<20120712193716.GN5039@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<1342123681_2236@CP5-2952>
	<20120713083426.GA5721@phenom.ffwll.local>
	<1342169397_3437@CP5-2952> <1342169622_3451@CP5-2952>
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-we0-f177.google.com (mail-we0-f177.google.com
	[74.125.82.177])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 112FFA1052
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 13 Jul 2012 02:05:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by weyr3 with SMTP id r3so2382344wey.36
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 13 Jul 2012 02:05:48 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1342169622_3451@CP5-2952>
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: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:53:33AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2012 09:49:48 +0100, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > No. Because by the time the previous breadcrumb has been seen we are
> > guarranteed to have flushed the gpu caches. So any wait in the future we
> > have flushed the caches before returning.
> 
> Egg on face time.
> 
> The issue is on the waiter side, since we don't wait unless
> pending_gpu_write is set. Tracking the last write seqno seems safest
> when removing the gpu_write_list.

Imo tracking the last write seqno would be an extension (i.e. separate
patch), the current code that just tracks pending_gpu_write should work
(and if I haven't botched up the i-g-t tests, it should be able to catch
that kind of stuff).
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48