On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Ben Widawsky
<benjamin.widaw...@intel.com> wrote:
> While implementing the workaround in the previous patch I noticed things were
> starting to get a bit messy. Since gen8 works differently enough from gen7, I
> thought splitting it out with be good.
>
> While here, get rid of gen8 MOCS which does nothing and was in the wrong place
> anyway.
>
> This patch is totally optional. I'd be willing to just always use buffer #2 on
> gen8+. Pre-HSW this wasn't allowed, but it looks like it's okay for gen8 too.
>
> v2: Move inactive batch generation to the top of the function in order to make
> the rest of the code easier to read.
>
> Jenkins results (still a bunch of spurious failures, I miss Mark):
> http://otc-mesa-ci.jf.intel.com/job/bwidawsk/169/
>
> v3: v2 had a bug in that it both didn't emit the right number of dwords, and 
> it
> didn't do ADVANCE_BATCH(). I'm moderately worried that there were no failures 
> as
> a result.
> http://otc-mesa-ci.jf.intel.com/job/bwidawsk/170/

I don't think putting Intel-internal links in the commit message is a good idea.

Ken's made similar comments to me.

Also, so much off the wall commentary...
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Reply via email to