On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 12:54:50PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > Chris Wilson <[email protected]> writes: > > > After Joonas complained about using READ_ONCE() on the only use of the > > variable in the function, where the intent was to simply document that > > the read was intentionally racy and unlocked, I switched the READ_ONCE() > > over to lockless_dereference(). However, in linux-next that has a > > stronger type-check to only allow pointers and is no longer > > interchangeable with READ_ONCE(), see commit 331b6d8c7afc > > ("locking/barriers: Validate lockless_dereference() is used on a pointer > > type") > > > > Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> > > Fixes: 67d97da34917 ("drm/i915: Only start retire worker when idle") > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]>
Ta, though if PeterZ complains more about superfluous use of data dependency barriers we may have to invent our own documentatary macro. -Chris > -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
