* [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1
@ 2012-08-22 23:40 Tejun Heo
2012-08-23 7:56 ` Chris Wilson
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2012-08-22 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx, dri-devel, linux-kernel
This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of
WQ_NON_REENTRANT.
Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c | 6 ++----
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c
index 9cf7dfe..a55ca7a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c
@@ -1536,11 +1536,9 @@ int i915_driver_load(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned long flags)
*
* All tasks on the workqueue are expected to acquire the dev mutex
* so there is no point in running more than one instance of the
- * workqueue at any time: max_active = 1 and NON_REENTRANT.
+ * workqueue at any time. Use an ordered one.
*/
- dev_priv->wq = alloc_workqueue("i915",
- WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_NON_REENTRANT,
- 1);
+ dev_priv->wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("i915", 0);
if (dev_priv->wq == NULL) {
DRM_ERROR("Failed to create our workqueue.\n");
ret = -ENOMEM;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1
2012-08-22 23:40 [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1 Tejun Heo
@ 2012-08-23 7:56 ` Chris Wilson
2012-08-23 8:43 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2012-08-23 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tejun Heo, Daniel Vetter; +Cc: intel-gfx, linux-kernel, dri-devel
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:40:57 -0700, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of
> WQ_NON_REENTRANT.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1
2012-08-23 7:56 ` Chris Wilson
@ 2012-08-23 8:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-08-23 19:22 ` Tejun Heo
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2012-08-23 8:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson; +Cc: Tejun Heo, Daniel Vetter, intel-gfx, linux-kernel, dri-devel
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:56:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:40:57 -0700, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of
> > WQ_NON_REENTRANT.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> for merging through any
tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT
removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next?
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1
2012-08-23 8:43 ` Daniel Vetter
@ 2012-08-23 19:22 ` Tejun Heo
2012-08-23 23:14 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tejun Heo @ 2012-08-23 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chris Wilson, intel-gfx, linux-kernel, dri-devel
Hello,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:43:25AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:56:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:40:57 -0700, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of
> > > WQ_NON_REENTRANT.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
> Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> for merging through any
> tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT
> removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next?
I think it would be better to route this one through drm-intel-next.
WQ_NON_REENTRANT won't be deprecated until after the next -rc1 anyway.
Thanks!
--
tejun
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1
2012-08-23 19:22 ` Tejun Heo
@ 2012-08-23 23:14 ` Daniel Vetter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Vetter @ 2012-08-23 23:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tejun Heo; +Cc: Chris Wilson, intel-gfx, linux-kernel, dri-devel
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:22:27PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:43:25AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 08:56:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:40:57 -0700, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of
> > > > WQ_NON_REENTRANT.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >
> > Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> for merging through any
> > tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT
> > removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next?
>
> I think it would be better to route this one through drm-intel-next.
> WQ_NON_REENTRANT won't be deprecated until after the next -rc1 anyway.
Queued for -next, thanks for the patch.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-08-23 23:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-08-22 23:40 [PATCH] i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1 Tejun Heo
2012-08-23 7:56 ` Chris Wilson
2012-08-23 8:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2012-08-23 19:22 ` Tejun Heo
2012-08-23 23:14 ` Daniel Vetter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox