[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b056a87c-b6b2-25e0-25c7-f7d422793a3e@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 10:27:00 +0000
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>,
Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
"moderated list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK"
<linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@...il.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
"open list:SYNC FILE FRAMEWORK" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/14] dma-buf/fence-chain: Add fence deadline support
On 18/02/2023 21:15, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
>
> Propagate the deadline to all the fences in the chain.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com> for this one.
> ---
> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c
> index a0d920576ba6..4684874af612 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c
> @@ -206,6 +206,18 @@ static void dma_fence_chain_release(struct dma_fence *fence)
> dma_fence_free(fence);
> }
>
> +
> +static void dma_fence_chain_set_deadline(struct dma_fence *fence,
> + ktime_t deadline)
> +{
> + dma_fence_chain_for_each(fence, fence) {
> + struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(fence);
> + struct dma_fence *f = chain ? chain->fence : fence;
Low level comment - above two lines could be replaced with:
struct dma_fence *f = dma_fence_chain_contained(fence);
Although to be fair I am not sure that wouldn't be making it less
readable. From the point of view that fence might not be a chain, so
dma_fence_chain_contained() reads a bit dodgy as an API.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> +
> + dma_fence_set_deadline(f, deadline);
> + }
> +}
> +
> const struct dma_fence_ops dma_fence_chain_ops = {
> .use_64bit_seqno = true,
> .get_driver_name = dma_fence_chain_get_driver_name,
> @@ -213,6 +225,7 @@ const struct dma_fence_ops dma_fence_chain_ops = {
> .enable_signaling = dma_fence_chain_enable_signaling,
> .signaled = dma_fence_chain_signaled,
> .release = dma_fence_chain_release,
> + .set_deadline = dma_fence_chain_set_deadline,
> };
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_chain_ops);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists