Jason Ekstrand writes:
> You can have a full reviewed-by
You're too kind :-)
--
-keith
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
On June 19, 2018 22:16:37 "Keith Packard" wrote:
Jason Ekstrand writes:
I don't think I have any more comments on this patch. It's gross but I
think it should work.
I'll mark you down as 'Acked-by' then. Neither of us loves the
implementation; I'll see about creating the kernel
Jason Ekstrand writes:
> I don't think I have any more comments on this patch. It's gross but I
> think it should work.
I'll mark you down as 'Acked-by' then. Neither of us loves the
implementation; I'll see about creating the kernel infrastructure
necessary to supplant it.
--
-keith
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Jason Ekstrand writes:
>
> > I suppose we probably shouldn't worry about current_time being greater
> than
> > INT64_MAX? I guess if that happens we have pretty big problems...
>
> Nope, we've already given up on that working -- it's a
Jason Ekstrand writes:
> I suppose we probably shouldn't worry about current_time being greater than
> INT64_MAX? I guess if that happens we have pretty big problems...
Nope, we've already given up on that working -- it's a couple hundred
years of system uptime. Neither of us have any concerns
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 5:36 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
> Jason Ekstrand writes:
>
> > I still don't really like this but I agree that this code really should
> not
> > be getting hit very often so it's probably not too bad. Maybe one day
> > we'll be able to drop the non-syncobj paths entirely.
Jason Ekstrand writes:
> I still don't really like this but I agree that this code really should not
> be getting hit very often so it's probably not too bad. Maybe one day
> we'll be able to drop the non-syncobj paths entirely. Wouldn't that be
> nice.
I agree. What I want to have is
I still don't really like this but I agree that this code really should not
be getting hit very often so it's probably not too bad. Maybe one day
we'll be able to drop the non-syncobj paths entirely. Wouldn't that be
nice. In the mean time, this is probably fine. I did see one issue below
with
Handle the case where the set of fences to wait for is not all of the
same type by either waiting for them sequentially (waitAll), or
polling them until the timer has expired (!waitAll). We hope the
latter case is not common.
While the current code makes sure that it always has fences of only
one
