On 01/10/2018 14:26, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 14:15:49)
On 01/10/2018 12:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 11:51:23)
Hm hm hm... my initial thought was that interrupts could be more delayed
than breadcrumb writes (more than one context
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 14:15:49)
>
> On 01/10/2018 12:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 11:51:23)
> >>
> >> Hm hm hm... my initial thought was that interrupts could be more delayed
> >> than breadcrumb writes (more than one context ahead), in which case
On 01/10/2018 12:06, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 11:51:23)
On 19/09/2018 20:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
Inside the execlists submission tasklet, we often make the mistake of
assuming that everything beneath the request is available for use.
However, the submission and
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-01 11:51:23)
>
> On 19/09/2018 20:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Inside the execlists submission tasklet, we often make the mistake of
> > assuming that everything beneath the request is available for use.
> > However, the submission and the request live on two
On 19/09/2018 20:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
Inside the execlists submission tasklet, we often make the mistake of
assuming that everything beneath the request is available for use.
However, the submission and the request live on two separate timelines,
and the request contents may be freed from an
