[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181211102710.GH14426@ulmo>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2018 11:27:10 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Mikko Perttunen <cyndis@...si.fi>,
Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>, emil.fsw@...de.io,
dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"open list:TEGRA ARCHITECTURE SUPPORT" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] host1x: cdma: use completion instead of semaphore
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:11:38AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:08 AM Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 10:51:04PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > In this usage, the two are completely equivalent, but the
> > > completion documents better what is going on, and we generally
> > > try to avoid semaphores these days.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/host1x/cdma.c | 6 +++---
> > > drivers/gpu/host1x/cdma.h | 4 ++--
> > > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > My understanding is that potentially many userspace processes could be
> > blocking on this, which I think is the reason for it being a semaphore.
> > Is the completion going to work for those cases as well?
>
> Yes, it behaves the exact same way here.
Great, I'll queue this for v4.22.
Thanks,
Thierry
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists