On 04/06/2013 05:09 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 12:26:40AM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
Now that we require 2.6.39, there's no need to also check for 2.6.29.
Calling drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_enable_fenced_relocs() without checking
should be safe, as it simply sets a flag.
This does remove the check for zero fences available, but that doesn't
seem worth checking.
Iirc this can only happen when we have ums and the ddx wants more fences
than it should ask for. Ums is long gone, too. Last two patches are
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
Thanks!
Aside: We have a bit an accounting bug here in libdrm in that libdrm and
the kernel don't take into account that the number of pinned fences can
change while running (e.g. per-crtc fbs or pageflipping temporarily
pinning more buffers).
Yeah, exactly...that's why I thought a one-time check an context
creation wasn't worth having.
Given that another fence undercount corner case bug
in UXA/libdrm survived for about 4 years until it was reported, I don't
care one bit ;-)
Cheers, Daniel
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
