On 01/21/2015 03:11 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:59:39 AM Chad Versace wrote:
>> On 01/09/2015 11:07 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
>>> Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
>>> places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
>>>
>
On 23/01/15 22:25, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Thursday, January 22, 2015 07:14:33 PM Emil Velikov wrote:
>> On 10/01/15 07:07, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
>>> Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
>>> places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
>>>
>> Would it
On Thursday, January 22, 2015 07:14:33 PM Emil Velikov wrote:
> On 10/01/15 07:07, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
> > places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
> >
> Would it be worth including this in the stable branch
On 10/01/15 07:07, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
> places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
>
Would it be worth including this in the stable branch ?
Cc:
Thanks
Emil
___
mes
On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 11:59:39 AM Chad Versace wrote:
> On 01/09/2015 11:07 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
> > places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
> >
> > Currently, we try to track exactly when a work
On 01/09/2015 11:07 PM, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
> places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
>
> Currently, we try to track exactly when a workaround flush is
> necessary (via the brw->batch.need_workaround_flush fla
Sandybridge requires the post-sync non-zero workaround in a ton of
places, and if you ever miss one, the GPU usually hangs.
Currently, we try to track exactly when a workaround flush is
necessary (via the brw->batch.need_workaround_flush flag). This is
tricky to get right, and we've botched it se
