Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: Late request cancellations are harmful

2016-04-11 Thread Chris Wilson
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 02:50:17PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 09/04/16 10:27, Chris Wilson wrote: > >Conceptually, each request is a record of a hardware transaction - we > >build up a list of pending commands and then either commit them to > >hardware, or cancel them. However, whilst

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: Late request cancellations are harmful

2016-04-11 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 09/04/16 10:27, Chris Wilson wrote: Conceptually, each request is a record of a hardware transaction - we build up a list of pending commands and then either commit them to hardware, or cancel them. However, whilst building up the list of pending commands, we may modify state outside of the

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915: Late request cancellations are harmful

2016-04-09 Thread Chris Wilson
Conceptually, each request is a record of a hardware transaction - we build up a list of pending commands and then either commit them to hardware, or cancel them. However, whilst building up the list of pending commands, we may modify state outside of the request and make references to the pending