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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox