+1
We still have some CPU overhead performance targets we haven't reached. One
of them is to decrease CPU overhead for one benchmark 4 times compared to
everything we already have in master. I don't know how we are going to do
that, but we'll try.
Marek
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 6:15 PM Dylan
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 2:06 PM Simon Ser wrote:
>
> From a user-space point-of-view, this looks super useful! The uAPI sounds
> good to me.
>
> Acked-by: Simon Ser
>
> Would be nice to have some short docs as well. Here's an example of a
> patch adding some docs for an ioctl [1], if you aren't
>From a user-space point-of-view, this looks super useful! The uAPI sounds
good to me.
Acked-by: Simon Ser
Would be nice to have some short docs as well. Here's an example of a
patch adding some docs for an ioctl [1], if you aren't familiar with
that. I think just some basic stuff (description,
Adding mesa-dev and wayland-devel for broader circulation.
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 5:19 PM Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
> Modern userspace APIs like Vulkan are built on an explicit
> synchronization model. This doesn't always play nicely with the
> implicit synchronization used in the kernel and
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:02 AM Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>
> Trying to pick this discussion back up. Daniel Stone thinks it's a
> half hour of API bashing to retarget all the MRs so, if the fd.o
> admins have some heads up, it should be tractable. Should we do this
> right after branching 21.1
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 8:39 AM Kenneth Graunke wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 6:28:23 AM PDT Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > On March 23, 2021 01:46:54 Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> [snip]
> > > One extra thought: can we also fork off anv Gen7.x support at the same
> > > time? If distros are
On 3/23/21 7:26 PM, Ian Romanick wrote:
I would like to wait a couple more releases to do this. I have a couple
things that I've been gradually working on for some of the non-i965
classic drivers that I'd like to land before they're put out to pasture.
I talked to ajax about this a few weeks
Trying to pick this discussion back up. Daniel Stone thinks it's a
half hour of API bashing to retarget all the MRs so, if the fd.o
admins have some heads up, it should be tractable. Should we do this
right after branching 21.1 along with the LTS branch?
--Jason
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:38 AM
On Tuesday, March 23, 2021 6:28:23 AM PDT Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On March 23, 2021 01:46:54 Kenneth Graunke wrote:
[snip]
> > One extra thought: can we also fork off anv Gen7.x support at the same
> > time? If distros are already going to be building i965 for Gen7.x from
> > that branch,
On March 23, 2021 01:46:54 Kenneth Graunke wrote:
On Monday, March 22, 2021 3:15:30 PM PDT Dylan Baker wrote:
Hi list,
We've talked about it a number of times, but I think it's time time to
discuss splitting the classic drivers off of the main development branch
again, although this time I
I'd like to see it happen, though I don't understand how to make these
coexist for distros. Would like to hear from the Debian/etc maintainers
of mesa.
Then again I *think* classic-lts doesn't need to be built for
armhf/arm64 at all, so I suppose I'm personally unaffected :-P
On Mon, Mar 22,
I would like to wait a couple more releases to do this. I have a couple
things that I've been gradually working on for some of the non-i965
classic drivers that I'd like to land before they're put out to pasture.
I talked to ajax about this a few weeks ago, and he was amenable at the
time.
I
On Monday, March 22, 2021 3:15:30 PM PDT Dylan Baker wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> We've talked about it a number of times, but I think it's time time to
> discuss splitting the classic drivers off of the main development branch
> again, although this time I have a concrete plan for how this would
>
13 matches
Mail list logo
