From 049b323321bbcb476b799f50dc6444c0ed5a0e0e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?=3D=3Futf-8=3Fq=3FMichel=5FD=3DC3=3DA4nzer=3F=3D?= Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:34:58 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] drm: Core vsync: Don't clobber target sequence number when scheduling signal. It looks like this would have caused signals to always get sent on the next vertical blank, regardless of the sequence number. Signed-off-by: Dave Airlie --- drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c index 78aae5b35c62..9d00c51fe2c4 100644 --- a/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c +++ b/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c @@ -296,8 +296,6 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(DRM_IOCTL_ARGS) ? &dev->vbl_sigs2 : &dev->vbl_sigs; drm_vbl_sig_t *vbl_sig; - vblwait.reply.sequence = seq; - spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags); /* Check if this task has already scheduled the same signal @@ -310,6 +308,7 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(DRM_IOCTL_ARGS) && vbl_sig->task == current) { spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags); + vblwait.reply.sequence = seq; goto done; } } @@ -340,6 +339,8 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(DRM_IOCTL_ARGS) list_add_tail((struct list_head *)vbl_sig, &vbl_sigs->head); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->vbl_lock, irqflags); + + vblwait.reply.sequence = seq; } else { if (flags & _DRM_VBLANK_SECONDARY) { if (dev->driver->vblank_wait2)