On 2023-10-16 11:29, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> On 2023-10-16 11:12, Matthew Brost wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 08:09:31PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-13 22:49, Luben Tuikov wrote:
On 2023-10-11 19:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
> Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work
On 2023-10-16 11:12, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 08:09:31PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote:
>> On 2023-10-13 22:49, Luben Tuikov wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-11 19:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work item have a dedicated
work item for each.
On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 08:09:31PM -0400, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> On 2023-10-13 22:49, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> > On 2023-10-11 19:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
> >> Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work item have a dedicated
> >> work item for each. This aligns with the design and intended use
On 2023-10-13 22:49, Luben Tuikov wrote:
> On 2023-10-11 19:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
>> Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work item have a dedicated
>> work item for each. This aligns with the design and intended use of work
>> queues.
>>
>> v2:
>>- Test for
On 2023-10-11 19:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
> Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work item have a dedicated
> work item for each. This aligns with the design and intended use of work
> queues.
>
> v2:
>- Test for DMA_FENCE_FLAG_TIMESTAMP_BIT before setting
> timestamp in
Rather than call free_job and run_job in same work item have a dedicated
work item for each. This aligns with the design and intended use of work
queues.
v2:
- Test for DMA_FENCE_FLAG_TIMESTAMP_BIT before setting
timestamp in free_job() work item (Danilo)
v3:
- Drop forward dec of
