https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98172
--- Comment #40 from Suzuki, Shinji <[email protected]> ---
Sorry I misunderstood your question and thought that you are asking if my
modification works or not. Your patch should work if mine works because yours
has tighter serialization. (My modification does not acquire mutex while
duplicating so->fence)
Yours is;
+ mtx_lock(&ctx->Shared->Mutex);
+ screen->fence_reference(screen, &fence, so->fence);
+ mtx_unlock(&ctx->Shared->Mutex);
Mine is;
+ screen->fence_reference(screen, &fence, so->fence);
(In reply to Michel Dänzer from comment #37)
> Created attachment 127413 [details] [review]
> Only protect concurrent access to so->fence
>
> Based on the discussion so far, this patch only protects concurrent acccess
> to so->fence. Shinji-san, does this work reliably for your test case?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
