Re: [PATCH 1/6] dma-buf: move dma_resv_prune_unlocked into dma_resv.c

["Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>]

Am 25.11.21 um 10:31 schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
> [SNIP]
>> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-resv.h b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
>> index eebf04325b34..e0558429a5ee 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/dma-resv.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/dma-resv.h
>> @@ -458,6 +458,7 @@ void dma_resv_fini(struct dma_resv *obj);
>>   int dma_resv_reserve_shared(struct dma_resv *obj, unsigned int num_fences);
>>   void dma_resv_add_shared_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence);
>>   void dma_resv_add_excl_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence);
>> +void dma_resv_prune_unlocked(struct dma_resv *obj);
>>   int dma_resv_get_fences(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence **pfence_excl,
>>   			unsigned *pshared_count, struct dma_fence ***pshared);
>>   int dma_resv_copy_fences(struct dma_resv *dst, struct dma_resv *src);
> I don't mind adding a dma_resv_prune for locked case, but I don't think unlocked would have benefits.
>
> Furthermore, I'm trying to remove the unlocked versions from i915. Could this be a prereq patch instead?
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/460722/?series=96115&rev=1

Yeah, that works for me as well.

I was on the edge of dropping that from TTM as well since this is really 
just abusing the interface to save a few bytes of memory.

Feel free to add an Acked-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> 
to the i915 patch if it helps to get that committed.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> ~Maarten
>
> ~Maarten
>