On 18 November 2016 at 15:26, Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 18, 2016 2:55 PM, "Emil Velikov" <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> [Pardon for dropping in uninvited] >> >> On 15 November 2016 at 18:04, Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Immutable metadata (modifiers) stored in the kernel is the only >> > scalable (and thus usable) solution here. There was an argument >> > against _mutable_ metadata attached to BOs and the synchronization >> > hell it can cause, but I've not seen any argument against _immutable_ >> > metadata. Trying to push the metadata (modifiers) through window >> > system protocols seems like a horrible idea to me, not just because of >> > that fact that window system protocols shouldn't care about >> > driver-specific stuff, but also because of the immense burden once you >> > realize that you have to fix all window system protocols and KMS apps >> > because 64 bits of metadata is not enough to support your hardware. >> > It's clearly not economically sustainable. >> > >> Wasn't this one of the things that were [supposed to be] discussed at >> XDC as part of the gbm2/liballoc ? >> Not too sure on the topic, so a simple yes/no would be appreciated. > > Yes. There is also a thread on dri-devel About it. > Afaict the dri-devel thread started after XDC. Seemingly you/others did not had the chance to have a productive brainstorming discussion and/or reach a consensus ? Either way, I won't deviate the thread any more.
Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
