Skip to contentSkip to conversation

i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1

PATCH Applied Tejun Heo 3 participants 5 messages Aug 22, 2012 – Aug 23, 2012

Subsystems (2)
DRM drivers Intel i915
lore
Share & tools
lore

Tejun Heo

author
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 i915: use alloc_ordered_workqueue() instead of explicit UNBOUND w/ max_active = 1

This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of WQ_NON_REENTRANT.

Signed-off-by Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c |    6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c +2 -4
index 9cf7dfe..a55ca7a 100644
@@ -1536,11 +1536,9 @@ int i915_driver_load(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned long flags)
 	 *
 	 * All tasks on the workqueue are expected to acquire the dev mutex
 	 * so there is no point in running more than one instance of the
-	 * workqueue at any time: max_active = 1 and NON_REENTRANT.
+	 * workqueue at any time.  Use an ordered one.
 	 */
-	dev_priv->wq = alloc_workqueue("i915",
-				       WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_NON_REENTRANT,
-				       1);
+	dev_priv->wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("i915", 0);
 	if (dev_priv->wq == NULL) {
 		DRM_ERROR("Failed to create our workqueue.\n");
 		ret = -ENOMEM;
Acked-by
#2 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Wilson
Quoted 4 lines · Tejun Heo

This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of WQ_NON_REENTRANT.

Signed-off-by Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Acked-by Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> for merging through any

tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next? -Daniel

Signature · 3 lines
Daniel Vetter
Mail: [email protected]
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48
author
#3 lore raw

Hello,

Quoted 11 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 6 lines · Chris Wilson
Quoted 4 lines · Tejun Heo

This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of WQ_NON_REENTRANT.

Signed-off-by Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Acked-by Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> for merging through any

tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next?

I think it would be better to route this one through drm-intel-next. WQ_NON_REENTRANT won't be deprecated until after the next -rc1 anyway.

Thanks!

Signature · 1 line
tejun
Applied
#4 lore raw
Quoted 9 lines · Tejun Heo

Hello,

Quoted 6 lines · Daniel Vetter
Quoted 5 lines · Chris Wilson
Quoted 4 lines · Tejun Heo

This is an equivalent conversion and will ease scheduled removal of WQ_NON_REENTRANT.

Signed-off-by Tejun Heo <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 1 line
Reviewed-by Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Acked-by Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> for merging through any

tree that pleases you (if it makes merging easier for WQ_NON_REENTRANT removal). Or should I just merge this through drm-intel-next?

I think it would be better to route this one through drm-intel-next. WQ_NON_REENTRANT won't be deprecated until after the next -rc1 anyway.

Queued for -next, thanks for the patch.
-Daniel

Signature · 3 lines
Daniel Vetter
Mail: [email protected]
Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48