On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:42 PM Eric Anholt wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:54 PM Rob Clark wrote:
> >
> > it seems like BE vs formats (vs llvm) is a constant nightmare, because
> > there are essentially no mesa dev's working on BE devices (ie. issues
> > are generally discovered long after
On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:54 PM Rob Clark wrote:
>
> it seems like BE vs formats (vs llvm) is a constant nightmare, because
> there are essentially no mesa dev's working on BE devices (ie. issues
> are generally discovered long after the fact when mesa changes finally
> propagate into into
it seems like BE vs formats (vs llvm) is a constant nightmare, because
there are essentially no mesa dev's working on BE devices (ie. issues
are generally discovered long after the fact when mesa changes finally
propagate into into enterprise distros).. but with gitlab we have now
a sane scheme to
Hi
Unfortunately rendering of glxgears on S/390 architecture (64bit, BigEndian)
is broken on Mesa 19.3.3. I bisected the issue and the git commit id d17ff2f7,
which came in between 19.2 and 19.3, caused the issue. After reverting this
commit, glxgears rendering is working again. I openend
Michel Dänzer writes:
>> actual_period = n * r - ε
>
> Is that still an issue if the (minimal) length of a vertical blanking
> period is subtracted from the computed period?
What you're doing is defining a 'window' of times which match the
desired frame -- any time within 'length of vertical
Michel Dänzer writes:
> Hmm, I didn't fully realize this in my reading of the draft, thanks
> Matias for pointing it out!
>
> That the timing of frame N+1 has to be specified when submitting frame
> N for presentation is odd to me TBH. While I can imagine this might be
> suitable for some apps
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2020-02-03 8:48 p.m., Keith Packard wrote:
> Michel Dänzer writes:
>
>> Instead of rounding to the nearest upcoming frame, should it
>> round to the earliest frame after the specified period has
>> passed? As written, it seems to contradict the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2020-02-03 9:16 p.m., Keith Packard wrote:
> "Matias N. Goldberg" writes:
>
>> I read your article.
>
> Thanks!
>
>> What I feel are missing are just minor pesky details:
>
> Yes, it's definitely a rough draft at best. Figuring out the right
>
