Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2017-11-15 09:18:00)
>
> On 14/11/2017 18:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Honestly I think the page_iter cache is useful and likely to already
> > exist or be used shortly after a portion of the object is rotated.
>
> How come? I thought CPU access to framebuffers is atypical
On 14/11/2017 18:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2017-02-27 14:31:17)
On 27/02/2017 10:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:14:12AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 27/02/2017 10:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2017-02-27 14:31:17)
>
> On 27/02/2017 10:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:14:12AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >>
> >> On 27/02/2017 10:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On
On 27/02/2017 10:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:14:12AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 27/02/2017 10:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 22/02/2017 08:44, Chris Wilson wrote:
I also think that's an argument for
On ma, 2017-02-27 at 10:21 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:14:12AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> > Perhaps you could say what kind of optimisation you have in mind to
> > save me guessing? :)
>
> I was thinking you would like an inactivity timer. Or we could have a
>
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:14:12AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 27/02/2017 10:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >>
> >>On 22/02/2017 08:44, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>>I also think that's an argument for improving the general cache
On 27/02/2017 10:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 22/02/2017 08:44, Chris Wilson wrote:
I also think that's an argument for improving the general cache rather
than arguing against using it.
Well I wasn't concerned about the cache
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:55:10AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 22/02/2017 08:44, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >I also think that's an argument for improving the general cache rather
> >than arguing against using it.
>
> Well I wasn't concerned about the cache per se, but about whether it
> is
On 22/02/2017 08:44, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 08:29:06AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 21/02/2017 15:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
On pe, 2017-02-17 at 15:10 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
so use it
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 08:29:06AM +, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 21/02/2017 15:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> >On pe, 2017-02-17 at 15:10 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
> >>so use it instead of reallocating a large
On 21/02/2017 15:01, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
On pe, 2017-02-17 at 15:10 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
so use it instead of reallocating a large temporary array every time we
bind a rotated framebuffer.
Signed-off-by: Chris
On pe, 2017-02-17 at 15:10 +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
> so use it instead of reallocating a large temporary array every time we
> bind a rotated framebuffer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
> Cc:
The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
so use it instead of reallocating a large temporary array every time we
bind a rotated framebuffer.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
Cc: Matthew Auld
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen
The object already stores (computed on the fly) the index to dma address
so use it instead of reallocating a large temporary array every time we
bind a rotated framebuffer.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
Cc: Matthew Auld
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen
14 matches
Mail list logo