search for: radeon_fence_any_seq_sign

...letions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > index a77b1c13ea43..bf4bfe65a050 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > @@ -283,28 +283,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct > radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) > } > > /** > - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers > + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers Not necessary a hard requirement, but I would like to keep the name since it...

...le changed, 40 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c index a77b1c13ea43..bf4bfe65a050 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c @@ -283,28 +283,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) } /** - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers * * @rdev: radeon device pointer * @target_seq: sequence number(s) we want to wait for * @intr...

Am 15.05.2014 11:38, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: > op 15-05-14 11:21, Christian K?nig schreef: >> Am 15.05.2014 03:06, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >>> op 14-05-14 17:29, Christian K?nig schreef: >>>>> + /* did fence get signaled after we enabled the sw irq? */ >>>>> + if >>>>>

...hristian. Does this modification look sane? diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c index bc844f300d3f..2d415eb2834a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c @@ -361,28 +361,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) } /** - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers * * @rdev: radeon device pointer * @target_seq: sequence number(s) we want to wait for * @intr...

...t; > + > + ret = fence_signal(&fence->base); > + if (!ret) > + FENCE_TRACE(&fence->base, "signaled from > radeon_fence_signaled\n"); > return true; > } > return false; > @@ -283,28 +381,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct > radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) > } > > /** > - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers > + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers > * > * @rdev: radeon device pointer > * @target_seq: sequence nu...

...rdev, int ring) +{ + if (__radeon_fence_process(rdev, ring)) wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); } @@ -302,9 +337,10 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq, { uint64_t last_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS]; bool signaled; - int i, r; + int i; while (!radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq)) { + long r; /* Save current sequence values, used to check for GPU lockups */ for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) { @@ -319,11 +355,11 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq, if (intr) { r = wait_event_interruptib...

Am 19.05.2014 15:35, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: > op 19-05-14 14:30, Christian K?nig schreef: >> Am 19.05.2014 12:10, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >>> op 19-05-14 10:27, Christian K?nig schreef: >>>> Am 19.05.2014 10:00, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >>>> [SNIP] >>>> The problem here is that the whole approach collides with the way >>>>

..., fence->ring)) { - fence->seq = RADEON_FENCE_SIGNALED_SEQ; + int ret; + + ret = fence_signal(&fence->base); + if (!ret) + FENCE_TRACE(&fence->base, "signaled from radeon_fence_signaled\n"); return true; } return false; @@ -283,28 +381,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) } /** - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers * * @rdev: radeon device pointer * @target_seq: sequence number(s) we want to wait for * @intr...

...t; wake_up_all(&rdev->fence_queue); > } > > @@ -302,9 +337,10 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq, > { > uint64_t last_seq[RADEON_NUM_RINGS]; > bool signaled; > - int i, r; > + int i; > > while (!radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(rdev, target_seq)) { > + long r; > > /* Save current sequence values, used to check for GPU lockups */ > for (i = 0; i < RADEON_NUM_RINGS; ++i) { > @@ -319,11 +355,11 @@ static int radeon_fence_wait_seq(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *target_seq, > if (intr...

...hristian. > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > index bc844f300d3f..2d415eb2834a 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_fence.c > @@ -361,28 +361,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct > radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) > } > > /** > - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers > + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers > * > * @rdev: radeon device pointer > * @target_seq: sequence nu...

Am 19.05.2014 10:00, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: > op 15-05-14 18:13, Christian K?nig schreef: >> Am 15.05.2014 17:58, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >>> op 15-05-14 17:48, Christian K?nig schreef: >>>> Am 15.05.2014 16:18, schrieb Maarten Lankhorst: >>>>> op 15-05-14 15:19, Christian K?nig schreef: >>>>>> Am 15.05.2014 15:04, schrieb

..., fence->ring)) { - fence->seq = RADEON_FENCE_SIGNALED_SEQ; + int ret; + + ret = fence_signal(&fence->base); + if (!ret) + FENCE_TRACE(&fence->base, "signaled from radeon_fence_signaled\n"); return true; } return false; @@ -283,28 +381,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) } /** - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers * * @rdev: radeon device pointer * @target_seq: sequence number(s) we want to wait for * @intr...

...t; > + > + ret = fence_signal(&fence->base); > + if (!ret) > + FENCE_TRACE(&fence->base, "signaled from > radeon_fence_signaled\n"); > return true; > } > return false; > @@ -283,28 +381,35 @@ static bool radeon_fence_any_seq_signaled(struct > radeon_device *rdev, u64 *seq) > } > > /** > - * radeon_fence_wait_seq - wait for a specific sequence numbers > + * radeon_fence_wait_seq_timeout - wait for a specific sequence numbers > * > * @rdev: radeon device pointer > * @target_seq: sequence nu...

fence_is_signaled callback should support being run in atomic context, but not in irq context. Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com> --- include/linux/fence.h | 23 +++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/fence.h b/include/linux/fence.h index d174585b874b..c1a4519ba2f5 100644 ---

This series applies on top of the driver-core-next branch of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/driver-core.git Before converting ttm to the new fence interface I had to fix some drivers to require a reservation before poking with fence_obj. After flipping the switch RCU becomes available instead, and the extra reservations can be dropped again. :-) I've done at least basic