Marek,
The problem is that the patch adds a lot of complicated code where it's
not needed, and I don't want to end up reverting that code and
re-implementing the new Radeon gem ioctl by myself.
Having a list of two fence objects and waiting for either of them
shouldn't be that complicated to implement, in particular when it's done
in a driver-specific way and you have the benefit of assuming that they
are ordered.
Since the new functionality is a performance improvement, If time is an
issue, I suggest we back this change out and go for the next merge window.
/Thomas
On 10/24/2011 07:10 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
Hi Thomas,
I have made no progress so far due to lack of time.
Would you mind if I fixed the most important things first, which are:
- sync objects are not ordered, (A)
- every sync object must have its corresponding sync_obj_arg, (B)
and if I fixed (C) some time later.
I planned on moving the two sync objects from ttm into radeon and not
using ttm_bo_wait from radeon (i.e. pretty much reimplementing what it
does), but it looks more complicated to me than I had originally
thought.
Marek
On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Thomas Hellstrom<tho...@shipmail.org> wrote:
Marek,
Any progress on this. The merge window is about to open soon I guess and we
need a fix by then.
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
