On 2018-11-05 09:24, Sean Paul wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 04:38:48PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
On 2018-11-01 12:18, Sean Paul wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 05:19:05PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> > msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
> > work definitions and a
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 04:38:48PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> On 2018-11-01 12:18, Sean Paul wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 05:19:05PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> > > msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
> > > work definitions and a list to track events submitted
>
On 2018-11-01 12:18, Sean Paul wrote:
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 05:19:05PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
work definitions and a list to track events submitted
to the display worker thread. We can avoid these
redundant list and its protection
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 05:19:05PM -0700, Jeykumar Sankaran wrote:
> msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
> work definitions and a list to track events submitted
> to the display worker thread. We can avoid these
> redundant list and its protection mechanism, if we
> subclass the
msm maintains a separate structure to define vblank
work definitions and a list to track events submitted
to the display worker thread. We can avoid these
redundant list and its protection mechanism, if we
subclass the work object to encapsulate vblank
event parameters.
Signed-off-by: Jeykumar
