Re: [PATCH 2/9] async: Introduce kfence, a N:M completion mechanism
From: Daniel Vetter
Date: Wed Jul 13 2016 - 07:03:01 EST
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:20:14AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:38:52AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Also, I'm not a particular fan of the k* naming, but I see 'fence' is
> > already taken.
> Agreed, I really want to rename the dma-buf fence to struct dma_fence -
> we would need to do that whilst it dma-buf fencing is still in its infancy.
+1 on dma_fence, seems to make more sense than plain struct fence.
Probably best to do after the recent pile of work from Gustavo to de-stage
sync_file has landed.
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation