On April 6, 2017 8:29:11 AM "Juan A. Suarez Romero"
wrote:
On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 07:44 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero
wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:06 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > Looking
On Mon, 2017-04-03 at 07:44 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:06 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > > Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's correct.
> > > (I
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:06 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
>> > Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Kristian Høgsberg
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Jason Ekstrand
> wrote:
> > Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's
> correct. (I
> > honestly wasn't expecting to come to that
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's correct. (I
> honestly wasn't expecting to come to that conclusion without more
> iteration.) That said, this raises some interesting questions. I
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:02 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero
wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:06 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> > Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's
> correct. (I honestly wasn't expecting to come to that conclusion without
> more
On Wed, 2017-03-29 at 12:06 -0700, Jason Ekstrand wrote:
> Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's correct. (I
> honestly wasn't expecting to come to that conclusion without more iteration.)
> That said, this raises some interesting questions. I added Kristian to the
Looking over the patch, I think I've convinced myself that it's correct.
(I honestly wasn't expecting to come to that conclusion without more
iteration.) That said, this raises some interesting questions. I added
Kristian to the Cc in case he has any input.
1. Should we do powers of two or
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Jason Ekstrand
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero <
> jasua...@igalia.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 13:05 +0100, Juan A. Suarez Romero wrote:
>> > Current Anv allocator assign memory in terms of a fixed
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 4:14 AM, Juan A. Suarez Romero
wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 13:05 +0100, Juan A. Suarez Romero wrote:
> > Current Anv allocator assign memory in terms of a fixed block size.
> >
> > But there can be cases where this block is not enough for a memory
On Wed, 2017-03-15 at 13:05 +0100, Juan A. Suarez Romero wrote:
> Current Anv allocator assign memory in terms of a fixed block size.
>
> But there can be cases where this block is not enough for a memory
> request, and thus several blocks must be assigned in a row.
>
> This commit adds support
Current Anv allocator assign memory in terms of a fixed block size.
But there can be cases where this block is not enough for a memory
request, and thus several blocks must be assigned in a row.
This commit adds support for specifying how many blocks of memory must
be assigned.
This fixes a
The current ANV allocator is restricted to allocate just 1 block of memory,
which causes crashes in some Vulkan CTS tests. This patch allows to allocate
more than 1 block.
This is a re-work for the first version, which had issues due the nature of the
lock-free free-list.
In this version,
13 matches
Mail list logo