Explicitly document that code can't assume that shared fences signal after the exclusive fence.
Signed-off-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com --- drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c index f26c71747d43..4ab02b6c387a 100644 --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-resv.c @@ -235,7 +235,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_resv_reset_shared_max); * @fence: the shared fence to add * * Add a fence to a shared slot, obj->lock must be held, and - * dma_resv_reserve_shared() has been called. + * dma_resv_reserve_shared() has been called. The shared fences can signal in + * any order and there is especially no guarantee that shared fences signal + * after the exclusive one. Code relying on any signaling order is broken and + * needs to be fixed. */ void dma_resv_add_shared_fence(struct dma_resv *obj, struct dma_fence *fence) {