On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 12:18 PM, Matt Turner <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Jason Ekstrand <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On July 7, 2017 1:52:54 PM Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Quoting Jason Ekstrand (2017-07-07 21:37:29) > >>> > >>> The reason we were doing this was to ensure that the kernel did the > >>> appropriate cross-ring synchronization and flushing. However, the > >>> kernel only looks at EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE to determine whether or not to > >>> insert a fence. It only cares about the domain for determining whether > >>> or not it needs to clflush the BO before using it for scanout but the > >>> domain automatically gets set to RENDER internally by the kernel if > >>> EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE is set. > >> > >> > >> Once upon a time we also depended upon EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE for correct > >> swapout. That was until I saw what you were planning to do for anv. Hmm, > >> that puts the oldest kernel that might support anv as > >> > >> commit 51bc140431e233284660b1d22c47dec9ecdb521e [v4.3] > >> Author: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > >> Date: Mon Aug 31 15:10:39 2015 +0100 > >> > >> drm/i915: Always mark the object as dirty when used by the GPU > > > > > > I think we're probably ok there. We have a hard requirement on memfd > which > > I think landed in 4.6 though I could be wrong about that. > > No. memfd_create was added in 3.17. > Bah. I don't know why 4.6 is stuck in my brain as being important but it is. :-/ In any case, is there some way we can check for that commit? Otherwise, I think the only real thing we can do is just hope you don't swap and accept corruption if you do. :-( --Jason
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
