<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Concurrent call to glClientWaitSync results in segfault in one of the waiters."
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98172#c34">Comment # 34</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Concurrent call to glClientWaitSync results in segfault in one of the waiters."
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98172">bug 98172</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:michel@daenzer.net" title="Michel Dänzer <michel@daenzer.net>"> <span class="fn">Michel Dänzer</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Suzuki, Shinji from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=98172#c31">comment #31</a>)
<span class="quote">> Why is this patch rejected?</span >
Because it'll have to be rebased on top of the updated patch 1.
<span class="quote">> Now I'm revisiting your patch. Do we need to have mutual exclusion on
> screen->fence_reference(screen, &fence, so->fence);
> and
> screen->fence_reference(screen, &so->fence, NULL);
> ?</span >
I'm not sure r600_fence_reference() is thread safe.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>