On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, wrote:
>>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>>
>>> We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
>>> fence spinlock but at the same time we don't
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, wrote:
> From: Jerome Glisse
>
> We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
> fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
> memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
> enforce both of this constraint.
>
> v2:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, wrote:
>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>
>> We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
>> fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
>> memory while holding the spinlock. This
From: Jerome Glisse
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
enforce both of this constraint.
v2: actually test build it
Fix
From: Jerome Glisse
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
enforce both of this constraint.
Fix
From: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
enforce both of this constraint.
Fix
From: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
enforce both of this constraint.
v2: actually test build it
Fix
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
memory while holding the spinlock. This patch make sure we
enforce
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com
We need to take reference on the sync object while holding the
fence spinlock but at the same time we don't want to allocate
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Jerome Glisse j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 7:34 PM, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com
We need to take reference on the sync object while
10 matches
Mail list logo