On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 6:21 AM Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tammi...@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 16.11.2018 10.33, Francisco Jerez wrote: > > Kenneth Graunke <kenn...@whitecape.org> writes: > [...] > >> Perhaps we'll get both configs working, and then will want to be able > >> to select between them. I question whether the additional URB is truly > >> that valuable - how large are the actual gains? - considering that we > >> have to stall in order to reconfigure everything anyway... > > It's more about value of additional space for caching textures. > > One can calculate required max URB space when GS/TS isn't used, whereas > textures can fill all available cache. For example, if draw does just a > single quad, L3 is better utilized with minimal URB space and leaving > rest for texture caching. > Right. URB (16) and ALL (80) config is the one with minimum URB allocation. But, it's not working probably because of a hardware bug. Inferring from above comments by ken and Eero, If we ever get it working, we should always be using just that one config and that's the config which h/w documentation recommends as well. Correct me if that's not what you meant. In that case, I would prefer to bypass all this code and do it in brw_upload_initial_gpu_state().
> > > That just means that the update frequency needs to be low enough for the > > stall overhead to be negligible -- E.g. at batch buffer boundaries or > > wherever we're getting stalled anyway. > > > - Eero > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
