From b2da9fe5d5994a104bbae154590070d698279919 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Widawsky Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:02:58 -0700 Subject: drm/i915: remove do_retire from i915_wait_request This originates from a hack by me to quickly fix a bug in an earlier patch where we needed control over whether or not waiting on a seqno actually did any retire list processing. Since the two operations aren't clearly related, we should pull the parameter out of the wait function, and make the caller responsible for retiring if the action is desired. The only function call site which did not get an explicit retire_request call (on purpose) is i915_gem_inactive_shrink(). That code was already calling retire_request a second time. v2: don't modify any behavior excepit i915_gem_inactive_shrink(Daniel) Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c') diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c index a0b5053c5a3..e06e46a3075 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c @@ -225,10 +225,10 @@ static int intel_overlay_do_wait_request(struct intel_overlay *overlay, } overlay->last_flip_req = request->seqno; overlay->flip_tail = tail; - ret = i915_wait_request(LP_RING(dev_priv), overlay->last_flip_req, - true); + ret = i915_wait_request(LP_RING(dev_priv), overlay->last_flip_req); if (ret) return ret; + i915_gem_retire_requests(dev); overlay->last_flip_req = 0; return 0; @@ -447,10 +447,10 @@ static int intel_overlay_recover_from_interrupt(struct intel_overlay *overlay) if (overlay->last_flip_req == 0) return 0; - ret = i915_wait_request(LP_RING(dev_priv), overlay->last_flip_req, - true); + ret = i915_wait_request(LP_RING(dev_priv), overlay->last_flip_req); if (ret) return ret; + i915_gem_retire_requests(dev); if (overlay->flip_tail) overlay->flip_tail(overlay); -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2