Kenneth Graunke kenn...@whitecape.org writes:
On 01/15/2014 12:47 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Kenneth Graunke kenn...@whitecape.org writes:
libdrm 2.4.52 introduces a new 'uint64_t offset64' field, intended to
replace the old 'unsigned long offset' field. To preserve ABI, libdrm
continues to
On 01/13/2014 03:56 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
libdrm 2.4.52 introduces a new 'uint64_t offset64' field, intended to
replace the old 'unsigned long offset' field. To preserve ABI, libdrm
continues to store the presumed offset in both locations.
On Broadwell, a 64-bit kernel may place BOs at
Kenneth Graunke kenn...@whitecape.org writes:
libdrm 2.4.52 introduces a new 'uint64_t offset64' field, intended to
replace the old 'unsigned long offset' field. To preserve ABI, libdrm
continues to store the presumed offset in both locations.
On Broadwell, a 64-bit kernel may place BOs at
On 01/15/2014 12:47 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
Kenneth Graunke kenn...@whitecape.org writes:
libdrm 2.4.52 introduces a new 'uint64_t offset64' field, intended to
replace the old 'unsigned long offset' field. To preserve ABI, libdrm
continues to store the presumed offset in both locations.
On
libdrm 2.4.52 introduces a new 'uint64_t offset64' field, intended to
replace the old 'unsigned long offset' field. To preserve ABI, libdrm
continues to store the presumed offset in both locations.
On Broadwell, a 64-bit kernel may place BOs at high ( 4G) addresses.
However, with a 32-bit
