Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 2/2] exa: do PrepareAccess for classic too, since we do need to map the frontbuffer.

You're confusing issues, yours is a performance issue, not a correctness issue. Maarten. On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Hervé Cauwelier wrote: > Ben Skeggs a écrit : >> On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:55 +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote: >>> - I'm surprised we didn't get serious complaints about not be

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 2/2] exa: do PrepareAccess for classic too, since we do need to map the frontbuffer.

Ben Skeggs a écrit : > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:55 +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote: >> - I'm surprised we didn't get serious complaints about not being able to >> render to the frontbuffer. > We don't get serious complaints because it's not an issue. EXA is given > the virtual address, and it remem

Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 2/2] exa: do PrepareAccess for classic too, since we do need to map the frontbuffer.

On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 21:55 +0100, Maarten Maathuis wrote: > - I'm surprised we didn't get serious complaints about not being able to > render to the frontbuffer. We don't get serious complaints because it's not an issue. EXA is given the virtual address, and it remembers it. The design of the m

[Nouveau] [PATCH 2/2] exa: do PrepareAccess for classic too, since we do need to map the frontbuffer.

- I'm surprised we didn't get serious complaints about not being able to render to the frontbuffer. --- src/nouveau_exa.c | 16 ++-- 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/nouveau_exa.c b/src/nouveau_exa.c index 20ad380..4b21e80 100644 --- a/src/nouveau_