On Saturday 25 May 2002 03:44 pm, Leif Delgass wrote: > This had crossed my mind too. The only problem is that there could still > be a short period of time where BM_GUI_TABLE isn't accurate, so it still > leaves the problem of being able to trust the contents of BM_GUI_TABLE for > buffer aging and adding descriptors to the ring.
Yeah, but that's only a problem if you're aging them. This is more food for thought type stuff at this point- it all boils down to what is the most optimal secure way of doing things. The less things we do per submission, the better. We may still end up un-mapping things, but pushing out 8 bytes for each 4k is less work than pushing out a command every vertex in the buffer. I'd love to come up with a way to not have to un-map things if at all possible so that we're not doing that either. Like I said, it's not really something you want to do often (just like you don't want to do ioctls all that often either... :-) -- Frank Earl _______________________________________________________________ Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference August 25-28 in Las Vegas -- http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
