On Thu, 27 May 2010 11:22:02 +0800, "Xiang, Haihao" <haihao.xi...@intel.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 04:52 +0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > > On Tue, 25 May 2010 13:06:50 +0800, "Xiang, Haihao" > > <haihao.xi...@intel.com> wrote: > > > This interface is the same as drm_intel_bo_alloc except the allocated > > > size isn't rounded up, so it bypasses the cache bucket. > > > > > > The size of the BO created by drm_intel_bo_alloc for a 1920x800,4:2:0 YUV > > > planar surface is 4M, it is about 2.2M if using drm_intel_bo_alloc_direct. > > > > You could just init a cache bucket of that size, and get BO caching with > > no overhead and no new interfaces. > > I ever considered modifying the cache bucket, including a new interface > to override the default cache bucket. The problem is that the the size > of the surface BO and related BO may vary from case to case, we don't > know the right size when initializing cache bucket.
We should probably just make a bunch more buckets. It's not like video is the only thing that suffers from overallocation. Mipmapped textures will tend to be 1.5 times a power of two in size.
pgp01jRZe6LfL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
