[Intel-gfx] [RFC 1/4] drm/i915: Move releasing of the GEM request from free to retire/cancel

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 08/04/16 16:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 02:54:55PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>
>> If we move the release of the GEM request (i.e. decoupling it from the
>> various lists used for client and context tracking) after it is complete
>> (either by the GPU retiring the request, or by the caller cancelling the
>> request), we can remove the requirement that the final unreference of
>> the GEM request need to be under the struct_mutex.
>>
>> v2: Execlists as always is badly asymetric and year old patches still
>> haven't landed to fix it up.
>>
>> v3: Extracted, rebased and fixed for GuC. (Tvrtko Ursulin)
>
> After you mentioned the unbalanced, the patches I reordered to fix that
> are:
>
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=tasklet&id=83dcde26caa26f4113c3e441c3c96c504fd88e13
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=tasklet&id=9f386a21d3f28db763102b5c4f97a90bd0dcfd08
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=tasklet&id=9afd878e2c9f7825b99dc839c7b5deb553b62e32
> https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ickle/linux-2.6/commit/?h=tasklet&id=a842a2b0b7e90148966f35488209c969a9a9da54

Want to send these four as standalone straight away for review then?

Regards,

Tvrtko