Daryll Strauss wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 04:05:33PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
> > I have a question about "what if physical memory is fragmented"?
> > The AGIPIOC_ALLOC call returns a 'physical' address.
> > This implies that the ALLOC is a single contiguous chunk of physical
> > memory
Hi!
I took a look at the source of mach64-0-0-2-branch, noticed mach64_blit is
defined, but not implemented yet. Any hints on how it's progressing?
I also noticed that there is dma_dispatch_clear and dma_dispatch_swap
implemented, so it seems DMA works to some extent. I also noticed they are
don
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 04:05:33PM -0800, Philip Brown wrote:
> I have a question about "what if physical memory is fragmented"?
> The AGIPIOC_ALLOC call returns a 'physical' address.
> This implies that the ALLOC is a single contiguous chunk of physical
> memory. Right?
>
> However, I cant imagi
Hi Philip!
> Sorry if this is repeat: haven't seen my original show up in 12 hours.
>
> I have a question about "what if physical memory is fragmented"?
> The AGIPIOC_ALLOC call returns a 'physical' address.
Not always. Only if the alloc type > 0 (which is chip specific). Otherwise,
you're not
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 09:40:29AM +, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Bill Currie wrote:
> >
> > This patch fixes undefined symbol errors for _compat_FogCoordfEXT (and likely
> > _compat_SecondaryColor3ubEXT and _compat_SecondaryColor3fEXT but I didn't
> > bother checking to see if they caused proble
