On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 11:55:29AM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c 
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> index 3cfcc78..3a3ba81 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c
> @@ -812,6 +812,7 @@ gen8_ring_sync(struct intel_ring_buffer *waiter,
>  
>       intel_ring_emit(waiter, MI_SEMAPHORE_WAIT |
>                               MI_SEMAPHORE_GLOBAL_GTT |
> +                             MI_SEMAPHORE_POLL |
>                               MI_SEMAPHORE_SAD_GTE_SDD);

I was thinking that we shouldn't need this. However the docs suck a bit
and they don't actually specify whether the hardware will wait for the
signal before even checking the semaphore once. But that sounds so
wrong that it can't possibly be true.

>       intel_ring_emit(waiter, seqno);
>       intel_ring_emit(waiter,
> -- 
> 1.8.5.3
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to