Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Feb 2023 10:27:00 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 03/14] dma-buf/fence-chain: Add fence deadline support | From | Tvrtko Ursulin <> |
| |
On 18/02/2023 21:15, Rob Clark wrote: > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> > > Propagate the deadline to all the fences in the chain. > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> > Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com> for this one. > --- > drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c > index a0d920576ba6..4684874af612 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-chain.c > @@ -206,6 +206,18 @@ static void dma_fence_chain_release(struct dma_fence *fence) > dma_fence_free(fence); > } > > + > +static void dma_fence_chain_set_deadline(struct dma_fence *fence, > + ktime_t deadline) > +{ > + dma_fence_chain_for_each(fence, fence) { > + struct dma_fence_chain *chain = to_dma_fence_chain(fence); > + struct dma_fence *f = chain ? chain->fence : fence;
Low level comment - above two lines could be replaced with:
struct dma_fence *f = dma_fence_chain_contained(fence);
Although to be fair I am not sure that wouldn't be making it less readable. From the point of view that fence might not be a chain, so dma_fence_chain_contained() reads a bit dodgy as an API.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> + > + dma_fence_set_deadline(f, deadline); > + } > +} > + > const struct dma_fence_ops dma_fence_chain_ops = { > .use_64bit_seqno = true, > .get_driver_name = dma_fence_chain_get_driver_name, > @@ -213,6 +225,7 @@ const struct dma_fence_ops dma_fence_chain_ops = { > .enable_signaling = dma_fence_chain_enable_signaling, > .signaled = dma_fence_chain_signaled, > .release = dma_fence_chain_release, > + .set_deadline = dma_fence_chain_set_deadline, > }; > EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_chain_ops); >
| |