On 04/01/2016 01:26 PM, Mark yao wrote:
On 2016年03月31日 16:08, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
As per the docs, atomic_commit should return -EBUSY "if an asycnhronous updated is requested and there is an earlier updated pending".
v2: Use the status of the workqueue instead of vop->event, and don't add a superfluous wait on the workqueue.
Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com
drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c index 3b8f652698f8..285f8cd5afe1 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/rockchip/rockchip_drm_fb.c @@ -282,6 +282,9 @@ int rockchip_drm_atomic_commit(struct drm_device *dev, struct rockchip_atomic_commit *commit = &private->commit; int ret;
- if (async && work_busy(&commit->work))
return -EBUSY;Sorry for reply late.
There is a comment on work_busy function describe :
"the test result is unreliable and only useful as advisory hints orfor debugging."
I don't know if it's suitable to use it here, does some guys know it?
I'm not sure, but if the reason is the caveat explained in find_worker_executing_work(), then it's probably safe (and would explain how the function is used in other parts in the kernel).
And then, the "flush_work(&commit->work);" is no needed if return -EBUSY here. you can remove it at this patch.
We still need to wait if it's being called in sync mode.
Regards,
Tomeu
ret = drm_atomic_helper_prepare_planes(dev, state); if (ret) return ret;
-- Ｍark Yao