On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 08:56 -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 12:33 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:47 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > In playing around yesterday, we found that some drivers will
> > > unnecessarily enable interrupts for vblank events. Si
On Wednesday, May 9, 2007 8:56 am Eric Anholt wrote:
> > I suspect doing it like this might break userspace expectations
> > about the behaviour of the vblank counter. It would be better to do
> > it similarly to how Eric Anholt did it for i915, i.e. by toggling
> > the vblank interrupt in the 2D d
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 12:33 +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:47 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > In playing around yesterday, we found that some drivers will
> > unnecessarily enable interrupts for vblank events. Since these tend to
> > happen frequently (60+ Hz), they'll cau
On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:47 -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> In playing around yesterday, we found that some drivers will
> unnecessarily enable interrupts for vblank events. Since these tend to
> happen frequently (60+ Hz), they'll cause your CPU to wake up a lot,
> which will waste power if they'
In playing around yesterday, we found that some drivers will
unnecessarily enable interrupts for vblank events. Since these tend to
happen frequently (60+ Hz), they'll cause your CPU to wake up a lot,
which will waste power if they're not really in use.
This patch hacks the radeon driver to on
