Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2017-10-04 14:51:18)
> On 04/10/17 14:05, Matthew Auld wrote:
> > On 4 October 2017 at 13:43, Lionel Landwerlin
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On 04/10/17 12:46, Matthew Auld wrote:
> >>> On 4 October 2017 at 12:19, Lionel Landwerlin
> >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>> From: Robert Bragg <[email protected]>
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Robert Bragg <[email protected]>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <[email protected]>
> > <SNIP>
> >
> >>>> +                       bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc(bufmgr, "mi_rpc dest bo",
> >>>> 4096, 64);
> >>> alignment=64 ?
> >>
> >> Alignment requirement for MI_RPC are lower than with surfaces and indeed
> >> 64bytes.
> > The minimum gtt alignment is 4K, so specifying 64bytes doesn't make sense.
> >
> Same can be said about an allocation of 4096 with alignement of 4096.
> 
> I can send a fix to set all of those to 0.

It still has some merit as pure documentation, even if it will be
converted to an alignment of 0 by the kernel. That will be useful if
instead of allocating a whole bo, you wish to do suballocations.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to