Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Jani Nikula (2018-03-22 09:34:18) >> On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) >> >> On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: >> >> > Chris

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

Quoting Jani Nikula (2018-03-22 09:34:18) > On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) > >> On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > >> > Chris Wilson writes: > >> >> -/* The write

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

On Wed, 21 Mar 2018, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) >> On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: >> > Chris Wilson writes: >> >> -/* The write will be ordered by the uncached read (itself >> >> -

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) > On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > > Chris Wilson writes: > > > >> We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide > >> ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-03-21 17:05:06) > Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) > > On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > > > Chris Wilson writes: > > > > > >> We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide > > >> ourselves

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

Quoting Michel Thierry (2018-03-21 17:01:12) > On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > > Chris Wilson writes: > > > >> We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide > >> ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

On 3/21/2018 3:46 AM, Mika Kuoppala wrote: Chris Wilson writes: We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we could detect new interrupts in the middle of processing the old

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

Chris Wilson writes: > We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide > ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we could > detect new interrupts in the middle of processing the old one). However, > in commit 767a983ab255

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

On 21/03/2018 09:10, Chris Wilson wrote: We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we could detect new interrupts in the middle of processing the old one). However, in commit 767a983ab255

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/execlists: Use a locked clear_bit() for synchronisation with interrupt

We were relying on the uncached reads when processing the CSB to provide ourselves with the serialisation with the interrupt handler (so we could detect new interrupts in the middle of processing the old one). However, in commit 767a983ab255 ("drm/i915/execlists: Read the context-status HEAD from