On Mon, 05 Nov 2012 15:28:42 +0000 Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 15:00:36 +0000, Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:03:13 +0100 > > Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > As FBC is commonly disabled due to limitations of the chipset upon > > > output configurations, on many systems FBC is never enabled. For those > > > systems, it is advantageous to make use of the stolen memory for other > > > objects and so we defer allocation of the FBC chunk until we actually > > > require it. This increases the likelihood of that allocation failing, > > > which in turns means that we are already taking advantage of the stolen > > > memory! > > > > I'm failing to see how this patch is doing what it advertises to do. At > > least applies to dinq it's only deferring the error check. None of the > > steps that now happen before allocating the stolen compressed fb use > > stolen memory. On any of the errors, we seem to free the stolen memory. > > I see a mode check, a platform/plane check, a tiling check, a debug > > check now happening before we setup compression, but I fail to see how > > that really effects anything.... I'm sorry if I am being obtuse, but > > could you please explain a bit better? > > All of those previous checks are more likely to be false - and > previously we never tried to recover the stolen memory. I can go back to > a single patch as this is now just an optimisation rather than > preventing a permanent loss of memory. > -Chris > On the basis that all the other checks are more likely to be false, it is: Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> if you want to keep it. Maybe update the commit message if you feel like it. -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
