From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751426AbcFWPaI (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:30:08 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f196.google.com ([209.85.161.196]:34822 "EHLO mail-yw0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750890AbcFWPaG (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jun 2016 11:30:06 -0400 From: Gustavo Padovan To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Stone , Daniel Vetter , Rob Clark , Greg Hackmann , John Harrison , laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com, seanpaul@google.com, marcheu@google.com, m.chehab@samsung.com, Sumit Semwal , Maarten Lankhorst , Gustavo Padovan Subject: [RFC 0/5] rework fences on struct sync_file Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 12:29:45 -0300 Message-Id: <1466695790-2833-1-git-send-email-gustavo@padovan.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.5.5 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Gustavo Padovan Hi all, This is an attempt to improve fence support on Sync File. The basic idea is to have only sync_file->fence and store all fences there, either as normal fences or fence_arrays. That way we can remove some potential duplication when using fence_array with sync_file: the duplication of the array of fences and the duplication of fence_add_callback() for all fences. Now when creating a new sync_file during the merge process sync_file_set_fence() will set sync_file->fence based on the number of fences for that sync_file. If there is more than one fence a fence_array is created. One important advantage approach is that we only add one fence callback now, no matter how many fences there are in a sync_file - the individual callbacks are added by fence_array. Two fence ops had to be created to help abstract the difference between handling fences and fences_arrays: .teardown() and .get_fences(). The former run needed on fence_array, and the latter just return a copy of all fences in the fence. I'm not so sure about adding those two, speacially .get_fences(). What do you think? Please comment! Thanks. Gustavo --- Gustavo Padovan (5): dma-buf/fence: add .teardown() ops dma-buf/fence-array: add fence_array_teardown() dma-buf/fence: add .get_fences() ops dma-buf/fence-array: add fence_array_get_fences() dma-buf/sync_file: rework fence storage in struct file drivers/dma-buf/fence-array.c | 30 ++++++++ drivers/dma-buf/fence.c | 21 ++++++ drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- drivers/staging/android/sync_debug.c | 5 +- include/linux/fence.h | 10 +++ include/linux/sync_file.h | 12 ++-- 6 files changed, 161 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-) -- 2.5.5