From: Linus T. <tor...@tr...> - 2002-05-28 16:20:22
|
On Tue, 28 May 2002, Keith Whitwell wrote: > > It's committed on the tcl branch now (it's also a minor optimization). Kevin, a quick look seems to imply that this _will_ cause a lock-up if some ioctl were to try to do an operation that fills more than one full ring-buffer. Which seems to be possible (even if it is probably unlikely). In that case, "radeon_wait_ring()" will always fail, because you haven't even told the card yet about the fact that you've updated the ring. Should you not add a COMMIT_RING() in the overflow case to before the call to radeon_wait_ring() in BEGIN_RING()? Or did I miss something? Linus |