On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 04:39:06PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:29:40AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > The existing ABI says that scanouts are pinned into the mappable region > > so that legacy clients (e.g. old Xorg or plymouthd) can write directly > > into the scanout through a GTT mapping. However if the surface does not > > fit into the mappable region, we are better off just trying to fit it > > anywhere and hoping for the best. (Any userspace that is cappable of > > using ginormous scanouts is also likely not to rely on pure GTT > > updates.) In the future, there may even be a kernel mediated method for > > the legacy clients. > > > > v2: Skip fence pinning when not mappable. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Cc: Satyanantha, Rama Gopal M <rama.gopal.m.satyanan...@intel.com> > > Cc: Deepak S <deepa...@linux.intel.com> > > Cc: Damien Lespiau <damien.lesp...@intel.com> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> > > --- > > Hum, isn't that still overlooking that we can't put the framebuffers at > the end of the GGTT?
Yes. We don't have the interface yet. When we do we can apply the vtd requirements as well.. -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
