On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 02:44:55PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote: > From: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> > > We have a few too many differences here, so finally take the prepared > abstraction and run with it. A few smaller changes are required to get > things into shape: > > - move i915_cache_level up since we need it in the gt funcs > - split up i915_ggtt_clear_range and move the two functions down to > where the relevant insert_entries functions are > - adjustments to a few function parameter lists > > Now we have 2 functions which deal with the gen6+ global gtt > (gen6_ggtt_ prefix) and 2 functions which deal with the legacy gtt > code in the intel-gtt.c fake agp driver (i915_ggtt_ prefix). > > Init is still a bit a mess, but honestly I don't care about that. > > One thing I've thought about while deciding on the exact interfaces is > a flag parameter for ->clear_range: We could use that to decide > between writing invalid pte entries or scratch pte entries. In case we > ever get around to fixing all our bugs which currently prevent us from > filling the gtt with empty ptes for the truly unused ranges ... > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> > > [bwidawsk: Moved functions to the gtt struct] > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Damien Lespiau <[email protected]> -- Damien _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
