On 11/26/25 14:19, Philipp Stanner wrote:

Barely anyone uses dma_fence_signal()'s (and similar functions') return code. Checking it is pretty much useless anyways, because what are you going to do if a fence was already signal it? Unsignal it and signal it again? ;p

Reviewed-by: Christian König christian.koenig@amd.com for the entire series.

Please push to drm-misc-next or leave me a note when I should pick it up.

Removing the return code simplifies the API and makes it easier for me to sit on top with Rust DmaFence.

BTW, I have an rb for embedding the lock and I'm now writing test cases.

When that is done you should be able to base the Rust DmaFence abstraction on that as well.

Regards, Christian.

Philipp Stanner (6): dma-buf/dma-fence: Add dma_fence_test_signaled_flag() amd/amdkfd: Ignore return code of dma_fence_signal() drm/gpu/xe: Ignore dma_fenc_signal() return code dma-buf: Don't misuse dma_fence_signal() drm/ttm: Remove return check of dma_fence_signal() dma-buf/dma-fence: Remove return code of signaling-functions

drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 59 ++++++------------- drivers/dma-buf/st-dma-fence.c | 7 +-- drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdkfd/kfd_process.c | 5 +- .../gpu/drm/ttm/tests/ttm_bo_validate_test.c | 3 +- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hw_fence.c | 5 +- include/linux/dma-fence.h | 33 ++++++++--- 6 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)