On Thursday, September 6, 2018 3:30:58 AM PDT Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> On 05/09/2018 18:01, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 3:30:42 AM PDT Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> >> Both brw_bo_map_cpu() & brw_bo_map_wc() assert if mapping the
> >> underlying BO fails. Failing back
On 05/09/2018 18:01, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 3:30:42 AM PDT Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
Both brw_bo_map_cpu() & brw_bo_map_wc() assert if mapping the
underlying BO fails. Failing back to brw_bo_map_gtt() doesn't seem to
make any sense for that reason.
We also only
On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 3:30:42 AM PDT Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
> Both brw_bo_map_cpu() & brw_bo_map_wc() assert if mapping the
> underlying BO fails. Failing back to brw_bo_map_gtt() doesn't seem to
> make any sense for that reason.
>
> We also only call brw_bo_map_gtt() for tiled buffers
Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2018-09-04 11:30:42)
> Both brw_bo_map_cpu() & brw_bo_map_wc() assert if mapping the
> underlying BO fails. Failing back to brw_bo_map_gtt() doesn't seem to
> make any sense for that reason.
>
> We also only call brw_bo_map_gtt() for tiled buffers which as far as
> we
Both brw_bo_map_cpu() & brw_bo_map_wc() assert if mapping the
underlying BO fails. Failing back to brw_bo_map_gtt() doesn't seem to
make any sense for that reason.
We also only call brw_bo_map_gtt() for tiled buffers which as far as
we know are never mapped coherent (coherent is a parameter
