On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 05:04:21PM +0100, Thomas Daniel wrote:
From: Oscar Mateo oscar.ma...@intel.com
As suggested by Daniel Vetter. The idea, in subsequent patches, is to
provide an alternative to these vfuncs for the Execlists submission
mechanism.
v2: Splitted into two and reordered
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 04:36:53PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 05:04:21PM +0100, Thomas Daniel wrote:
From: Oscar Mateo oscar.ma...@intel.com
As suggested by Daniel Vetter. The idea, in subsequent patches, is to
provide an alternative to these vfuncs for the
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 05:04:21PM +0100, Thomas Daniel wrote:
@@ -1408,8 +1408,8 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device *dev, void
*data,
else
exec_start += i915_gem_obj_offset(batch_obj, vm);
- ret = legacy_ringbuffer_submission(dev, file, ring, ctx,
-
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 05:04:21PM +0100, Thomas Daniel wrote:
From: Oscar Mateo oscar.ma...@intel.com
As suggested by Daniel Vetter. The idea, in subsequent patches, is to
provide an alternative to these vfuncs for the Execlists submission
mechanism.
v2: Splitted into two and reordered
From: Oscar Mateo oscar.ma...@intel.com
As suggested by Daniel Vetter. The idea, in subsequent patches, is to
provide an alternative to these vfuncs for the Execlists submission
mechanism.
v2: Splitted into two and reordered to illustrate our intentions, instead
of showing it off. Also, remove
