| Message ID | 1412604925-11290-3-git-send-email-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 03:15:06PM +0100, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote: > From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> Empty commit messages are a bit too thin. E.g. in this case this was an oversight from commit c8725f3dc0911d4354315a65150aecd8b7d0d74a Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Date: Mon Mar 17 12:21:55 2014 +0000 drm/i915: Do not call retire_requests from wait_for_rendering which means your patch here really should have Cc'ed patch author and revierer (i.e. Chris & Brad) of the offending patch, too. Especially in GEM where some of the interactions are _really_ tricky you can't just remove code that looks funky. You really have to dig into the history and find solid evidence that this is really just an oversight and not something deeper. > For: VIZ-4377 > Signed-off-by: John.C.Harrison@Intel.com Youre sob line isn't quite up to spec, it should have a full name + mail address (like the From: line git send-email inserted). -Daniel > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index 8c68219..aa2d882 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -1281,8 +1281,7 @@ i915_wait_seqno(struct intel_engine_cs *ring, uint32_t seqno) > } > > static int > -i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, > - struct intel_engine_cs *ring) > +i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) > { > if (!obj->active) > return 0; > @@ -1319,7 +1318,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, > if (ret) > return ret; > > - return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring); > + return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj); > } > > /* A nonblocking variant of the above wait. This is a highly dangerous routine > @@ -1359,7 +1358,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__nonblocking(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, > if (ret) > return ret; > > - return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring); > + return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj); > } > > /** > -- > 1.7.9.5 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 03:15:06PM +0100, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote: >> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> > > Empty commit messages are a bit too thin. E.g. in this case this was an > oversight from > > commit c8725f3dc0911d4354315a65150aecd8b7d0d74a > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> > Date: Mon Mar 17 12:21:55 2014 +0000 > > drm/i915: Do not call retire_requests from wait_for_rendering > > which means your patch here really should have Cc'ed patch author and > revierer (i.e. Chris & Brad) of the offending patch, too. To make things clear: Cc'ing people isn't to assign blame for every single mistake they do (we're all racking up impressive amounts of them anyway), but to give them a learning opportunity and the chance to improve. It is pretty much impossible to follow intel-gfx and read everything that's on here even for me, so if you don't cc people for even the most mundane and small things they'll miss the mail. -Daniel
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c index 8c68219..aa2d882 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c @@ -1281,8 +1281,7 @@ i915_wait_seqno(struct intel_engine_cs *ring, uint32_t seqno) } static int -i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, - struct intel_engine_cs *ring) +i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) { if (!obj->active) return 0; @@ -1319,7 +1318,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, if (ret) return ret; - return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring); + return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj); } /* A nonblocking variant of the above wait. This is a highly dangerous routine @@ -1359,7 +1358,7 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__nonblocking(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj, if (ret) return ret; - return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj, ring); + return i915_gem_object_wait_rendering__tail(obj); } /**