Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] dma-fence: Store the timestamp in the same union as the cb_list

2019-08-17 Thread Koenig, Christian
Am 17.08.19 um 17:27 schrieb Chris Wilson: > Quoting Koenig, Christian (2019-08-17 16:20:12) >> Am 17.08.19 um 16:47 schrieb Chris Wilson: >>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c >>> index 89d96e3e6df6..2c21115b1a37 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] dma-fence: Store the timestamp in the same union as the cb_list

2019-08-17 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Koenig, Christian (2019-08-17 16:20:12) > Am 17.08.19 um 16:47 schrieb Chris Wilson: > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c > > index 89d96e3e6df6..2c21115b1a37 100644 > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c > > @@

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] dma-fence: Store the timestamp in the same union as the cb_list

2019-08-17 Thread Koenig, Christian
Am 17.08.19 um 16:47 schrieb Chris Wilson: > The timestamp and the cb_list are mutually exclusive, the cb_list can > only be added to prior to being signaled (and once signaled we drain), > while the timestamp is only valid upon being signaled. Both the > timestamp and the cb_list are only valid

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] dma-fence: Store the timestamp in the same union as the cb_list

2019-08-17 Thread Chris Wilson
The timestamp and the cb_list are mutually exclusive, the cb_list can only be added to prior to being signaled (and once signaled we drain), while the timestamp is only valid upon being signaled. Both the timestamp and the cb_list are only valid while the fence is alive, and as soon as no