Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Once the 915 super ioctl is merged, the patch attached removes the 
> unused interfaces left behind...
>
> Are any of these worth saving?
>
> Dave.
>
>   
Dave,
As mentioned previously to Eric, I think we should keep the single 
buffer validate interface with the exception that the hint
DRM_BO_HINT_DONT_FENCE is implied, and use that instead of the set pin 
interface. We can perhaps rename it to drmBOSetStatus or something more 
suitable.

This will get rid of the user-space unfenced list access (which I 
believe was the main motivation behind the set pin interface?) while 
keeping the currently heavily used (at least in Poulsbo) functionality 
to move out NO_EVICT scanout buffers to local memory before unpinning 
them, (to avoid VRAM and TT fragmentation, as DRI clients may still 
reference those buffers, so they won't get destroyed before a new one is 
allocated).

It would also allow us to specify where we want to pin buffers. If we 
remove the memory flag specification from drmBOCreate there's no other 
way to do that, except running the buffer through a superioctl which 
isn't very nice.

Also it would make it much easier to unbreak i915 zone rendering and 
derived work.

If we can agree on this, I'll come up with a patch.

/Thomas





> ------------------------------------------------------------------------




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to