On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:49 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 11:21:23AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> > From: Rob Clark
> >
> > In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
> > like sub-allocation, etc) to allow userspace to opt-out of implicit
> > sync on p
On Thu, 5 Jan 2023 at 15:51, Rob Clark wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:49 AM Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 11:21:23AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > From: Rob Clark
> > >
> > > In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
> > > like sub-allocatio
On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 11:21:23AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote:
> From: Rob Clark
>
> In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
> like sub-allocation, etc) to allow userspace to opt-out of implicit
> sync on per-BO basis.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark
> ---
> drivers/gpu/d
On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 2:15 AM Lucas Stach wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> Am Dienstag, dem 06.12.2022 um 11:21 -0800 schrieb Rob Clark:
> > From: Rob Clark
> >
> > In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
> > like sub-allocation, etc) to allow userspace to opt-out of implicit
Hi Rob,
Am Dienstag, dem 06.12.2022 um 11:21 -0800 schrieb Rob Clark:
> From: Rob Clark
>
> In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
> like sub-allocation, etc) to allow userspace to opt-out of implicit
> sync on per-BO basis.
>
Out of curiosity and because I have be
From: Rob Clark
In cases where implicit sync is used, it is still useful (for things
like sub-allocation, etc) to allow userspace to opt-out of implicit
sync on per-BO basis.
Signed-off-by: Rob Clark
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_drv.c| 3 ++-
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c | 11 +
