[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160804211853.GA2478@joana>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 18:18:53 -0300
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, marcheu@...gle.com,
Daniel Stone <daniels@...labora.com>, seanpaul@...gle.com,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.co.uk>,
John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@...el.com>, m.chehab@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] dma-buf/sync_file: only enable fence signalling
on poll()
2016-08-03 Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 03:08:45PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@...labora.co.uk>
> >
> > Signalling doesn't need to be enabled at sync_file creation, it is only
> > required if userspace waiting the fence to signal through poll().
> >
> > Thus we delay fence_add_callback() until poll is called. It only adds the
> > callback the first time poll() is called. This avoid re-adding the same
> > callback multiple times.
> >
> > v2: rebase and update to work with new fence support for sync_file
> >
> > v3: use atomic operation to set enabled and protect fence_add_callback()
>
> There's actually a spare bit in fence->flags you can use for this.
>
> #define POLL_ENABLED FENCE_FLAG_USER_BITS
Wouldn't it be better to add a new bit to fence_flags_bit?
Gustavo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists