Hi Christian, hi Thomas,
On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 11:42:56AM +0100, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote:
> Nice. This seems to have all we need for now for Xe as well, although not
> for i915 ATM.
A series to use drm_exec in Xe has been sent for review:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/116477/
Hi Christian
On 2/28/23 09:33, Christian König wrote:
This adds the infrastructure for an execution context for GEM buffers
which is similar to the existinc TTMs execbuf util and intended to replace
it in the long term.
The basic functionality is that we abstracts the necessary loop to lock
On 2023-02-28 03:33, Christian König wrote:
> This adds the infrastructure for an execution context for GEM buffers
> which is similar to the existinc TTMs execbuf util and intended to replace
> it in the long term.
>
> The basic functionality is that we abstracts the necessary loop to lock
>
On 2023-02-28 14:13, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On 2/28/23 09:33, Christian König wrote:
>> This adds the infrastructure for an execution context for GEM buffers
>> which is similar to the existinc TTMs execbuf util and intended to replace
>
> "existing"
>
>> it in the long term.
>>
>> The basic
Am 28.02.23 um 20:13 schrieb Danilo Krummrich:
[SNIP]
+ if (exec->prelocked) {
+ dma_resv_unlock(exec->prelocked->resv);
+ drm_gem_object_put(exec->prelocked);
+ exec->prelocked = NULL;
+ }
Let's say we try to lock 3 objects A, B and C in chronological order
and in
On 2/28/23 09:33, Christian König wrote:
This adds the infrastructure for an execution context for GEM buffers
which is similar to the existinc TTMs execbuf util and intended to replace
"existing"
it in the long term.
The basic functionality is that we abstracts the necessary loop to lock
This adds the infrastructure for an execution context for GEM buffers
which is similar to the existinc TTMs execbuf util and intended to replace
it in the long term.
The basic functionality is that we abstracts the necessary loop to lock
many different GEM buffers with automated deadlock and
