From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753395AbcLMLxR (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:53:17 -0500
Received: from mail-vk0-f68.google.com ([209.85.213.68]:35585 "EHLO
        mail-vk0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752619AbcLMLxP (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 13 Dec 2016 06:53:15 -0500
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 09:53:09 -0200
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, robdclark@gmail.com,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        "open list:VIRTIO GPU DRIVER" 
        <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/5] drm/virtio: add virtio_gpu_alloc_fence()
Message-ID: <20161213115309.GC17187@joana>
Mail-Followup-To: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>,
        Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        robdclark@gmail.com,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        "open list:VIRTIO GPU DRIVER" <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <1481575710-12535-1-git-send-email-gustavo@padovan.org>
 <1481611645.27088.56.camel@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1481611645.27088.56.camel@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

2016-12-13 Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>:

>   Hi,
> 
> > +struct virtio_gpu_fence *virtio_gpu_fence_alloc(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct virtio_gpu_fence_driver *drv = &vgdev->fence_drv;
> > +	struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence;
> > +	unsigned long irq_flags;
> > +
> > +	fence = kmalloc(sizeof(struct virtio_gpu_fence), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > +	if (!fence)
> > +		return NULL;
> > +
> 
> > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&drv->lock, irq_flags);
> > +	fence->drv = drv;
> > +	fence->seq = ++drv->sync_seq;
> > +	dma_fence_init(&fence->f, &virtio_fence_ops, &drv->lock,
> > +		       drv->context, fence->seq);
> > +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&drv->lock, irq_flags);
> 
> seq assignment ...
> 
> > +
> > +	return fence;
> > +}
> > +
> >  int virtio_gpu_fence_emit(struct virtio_gpu_device *vgdev,
> >  			  struct virtio_gpu_ctrl_hdr *cmd_hdr,
> > -			  struct virtio_gpu_fence **fence)
> > +			  struct virtio_gpu_fence *fence)
> >  {
> >  	struct virtio_gpu_fence_driver *drv = &vgdev->fence_drv;
> >  	unsigned long irq_flags;
> >  
> > -	*fence = kmalloc(sizeof(struct virtio_gpu_fence), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > -	if ((*fence) == NULL)
> > -		return -ENOMEM;
> > -
> >  	spin_lock_irqsave(&drv->lock, irq_flags);
> > -	(*fence)->drv = drv;
> > -	(*fence)->seq = ++drv->sync_seq;
> > -	dma_fence_init(&(*fence)->f, &virtio_fence_ops, &drv->lock,
> > -		       drv->context, (*fence)->seq);
> 
> ... must stay here.  Otherwise requests can be submitted to the virt
> queue with fence sequence numbers out of order.

Yes, makes sense. So I'll just leave the kmalloc in there.

Gustavo