On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 02:24:19PM +0100, oscar.ma...@intel.com wrote: > + i915_gem_execbuffer_move_to_active(vmas, ring); > + i915_gem_execbuffer_retire_commands(dev, file, ring, batch_obj);
This is where I start freaking out over the mix of global vs logical state and the implications of reordering. The key question for me is how clean busy-ioctl is when it has to pick up the pieces from a partial failure to submit. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
