gt; > > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:29 PM
> > > To: Harrison, John C
> > > Cc: Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
> > > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 00/28] Replace seqno values with
> > > request
> > > structures
> > >
> &
ison, John C
> > Cc: Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
> > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 00/28] Replace seqno values with request
> > structures
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:18:51PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> > > From: John Harrison
> > >
> -Original Message-
> From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-boun...@lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf
> Of Daniel Vetter
> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 7:29 PM
> To: Harrison, John C
> Cc: Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 00/28]
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:18:51PM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison
>
> There is a general feeling that it is better to move away from using a simple
> integer 'seqno' value to track batch buffer completion. Instead, the request
> structure should be used. That provid
From: John Harrison
There is a general feeling that it is better to move away from using a simple
integer 'seqno' value to track batch buffer completion. Instead, the request
structure should be used. That provides for much more flexibility going
forwards. Especially which things like a GPU sched
