Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2018-01-24 04:57:20) > On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 1:32:53 AM PST Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2018-01-23 09:28:20) > > > The purpose of the workaround BO is to write to it. > > > > Do you care for the serialisation here? I thought the purpose of the wa > > was just for write-only memory, so lying to the kernel to disable write > > hazards is acceptable. > > -Chris > > We don't usually read it, so it should be fine, but I don't like lying > about things...it was more an oversight than an intentional way to avoid > synchronization. What synchronization would there be, anyway, assuming > we don't ever read it or map it?
We share the w/a bo on the screen, iirc, so there may be unexpected ordering between contexts. (Writes are strongly ordered, reads weakly, i.e. 2 reads may be executed in either order.) -Chris _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
