Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] intel: Add support for (possibly) unsynchronized maps.
On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 19:53:22 -0800, Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net wrote: This improves the performance of Mesa's GL_MAP_UNSYNCHRONIZED_BIT path in GL_ARB_map_buffer_range. Improves Unigine Tropics performance at 1024x768 by 2.06236% +/- 0.50272% (n=11). Oh well, weakly coherent wins. Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] intel: Add support for (possibly) unsynchronized maps.
Dear Eric, Am Freitag, den 24.02.2012, 19:53 -0800 schrieb Eric Anholt: […] +/** + * Performs a mapping of the buffer object like the normal GTT + * mapping, but avoiding waiting for the GPU to be done reading from s/avoiding/avoids/? + * or rendering to the buffer. + * + * This is used in the implementation of GL_ARB_map_buffer_range: The + * user asks to create a buffer, then does a mapping, fills some + * space, runs a drawing command, then asks to map it again without + * synchronizing because it guarantees that it won't write over the + * data that the GPU is busy using (or, more specifically, that if it + * does write over the data, it acknowledges that rendering is + * undefined). + */ + +int drm_intel_gem_bo_map_unsynchronized(drm_intel_bo *bo) […] Thanks, Paul signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] intel: Add support for (possibly) unsynchronized maps.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 07:53:22PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: This improves the performance of Mesa's GL_MAP_UNSYNCHRONIZED_BIT path in GL_ARB_map_buffer_range. Improves Unigine Tropics performance at 1024x768 by 2.06236% +/- 0.50272% (n=11). --- A few questions: - iirc Ben's non-blocking stuff also worked for non-llc machines - I guess you haven't looked into this because we don't have a non-llc platform that runs ungine? - in my pwrite experience, writing through cpu maps beats writing through the gtt on llc machines. This has the added benefit that it reduces pressure on the mappable gtt. Have you tried that, too? Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: dan...@ffwll.ch Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48 ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] intel: Add support for (possibly) unsynchronized maps.
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:00:07 +0100, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote: - in my pwrite experience, writing through cpu maps beats writing through the gtt on llc machines. This has the added benefit that it reduces pressure on the mappable gtt. Have you tried that, too? Speaking of which, those wonderful pwrite patches are still MIA? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
