On ma, 2017-02-20 at 13:12 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 20-02-17 om 13:03 schreef Chris Wilson:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 01:32:42PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > >
> > > Smells like a helper function? While that helper is finding the way
> > > upstream;
> > Blurgh.
> >
> >
Op 20-02-17 om 13:03 schreef Chris Wilson:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 01:32:42PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
>> On pe, 2017-02-17 at 18:35 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> The code currently assumes that all fence arrays it sees are the normal
>>> signal-on-all variety, and decomposes the array
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 01:32:42PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> On pe, 2017-02-17 at 18:35 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > The code currently assumes that all fence arrays it sees are the normal
> > signal-on-all variety, and decomposes the array into its individual
> > fences so that it can
On pe, 2017-02-17 at 18:35 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> The code currently assumes that all fence arrays it sees are the normal
> signal-on-all variety, and decomposes the array into its individual
> fences so that it can extract the native i915 fences. If the fence array
> is using signal-on-any,
The code currently assumes that all fence arrays it sees are the normal
signal-on-all variety, and decomposes the array into its individual
fences so that it can extract the native i915 fences. If the fence array
is using signal-on-any, we should not decompose as we must not wait on
them all, just
