On 24 October 2011 14:16, Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: > I did do some testing by making libdrm claim a smaller aperture size > and thus trigger the rollback code, which caught one bug. Generally, > piglit doesn't trigger rollback at all, which is a bit concerning from > a testing coverage standpoint. > > For people reviewing, I think the interesting part to review is mostly > making sure that my assertions about the incremental changes of moving > things from prepare() to emit() are true. A particular risk would be > if I moved something from prepare() time (before all emit() calls) to > emit() time (after some emit() calls) without noticing the dependency > by those emits() in between. > > No noticeable performance impact from the change, though I was hoping > to drop CPU usage a bit. Oh well. > > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev >
I don't understand enough of the code to give a reviewed-by, but I've read through all of it, and other than the comments I've already made, nothing jumped out at me as a problem. Acked-by: Paul Berry <stereotype...@gmail.com>
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
