On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 04:54:55PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 05:02:56PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> > for proper refcounting to take place as we use
> > i915_add_request() for it.
> >
> > i915_add_request() also takes the context for the request
> > from ring->last_context so move the null state batch
> > submission after the ring context has been set.
> >
> > v2: we need to check for correct ring now (Ville Syrjälä)
> > v3: no need to expose i915_gem_move_object_to_active (Chris Wilson)
> >
> > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Damien Lespiau <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]>
>
> Merged with Ville's irc r-b, thanks for the quick fix.
Pity, it still contains some code that I'd rather not start
cargo-culting.
> > - ret = i915_add_request(ring, &seqno);
> > + vma = i915_gem_obj_to_ggtt(so->obj);
> > + if (vma == NULL) {
> > + ret = -ENOSPC;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
We use the GGTT vma much earlier, so this is suspect.
> > +
> > + i915_vma_move_to_active(vma, ring);
> > +
> > + ret = __i915_add_request(ring, NULL, so->obj, NULL);
> > + if (ret)
> > + i915_gem_object_move_to_inactive(so->obj);
As is move-to-inactive here. The only way add-request can fail is via an
EIO, and that will have triggered the move-to-inactive already - which
should nicely catch a BUG or two.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
