On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 09:47 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Tuesday, February 3, 2009 9:26 am Michel Dänzer wrote: > > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 08:58 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > > > What I'm saying is that anything greater than a few hundred frames (up > > > to the limit) will be caught by the timeout, > > > > If it wasn't for the problems that triggered all these discussions... > > No, remember the problem that triggered this was the current, broken test, > that was returning false for sequence numbers less than a few million of the > current sequence number. So with a large cap (2^31) or a small cap that > problem will be fixed.
The existing test isn't broken, it has a 'cap' of (2^32 - 2^23). Your change just happens to help with your driver problem because it changes the 'cap' such that counter jumps by your dev->max_vblank_count result in reasonable wait requests to be considered as 'has passed'. Maybe we'll just have to agree to completely disagree on this. :} -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.vmware.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Create and Deploy Rich Internet Apps outside the browser with Adobe(R)AIR(TM) software. With Adobe AIR, Ajax developers can use existing skills and code to build responsive, highly engaging applications that combine the power of local resources and data with the reach of the web. Download the Adobe AIR SDK and Ajax docs to start building applications today-http://p.sf.net/sfu/adobe-com -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
