On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 09:34:10AM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Monday, July 06, 2015 11:33:08 AM Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Since the workaround bo is used strictly as a write-only buffer, we need
> > only allocate one per screen and use the same one from all contexts.
> >
> > (The caveat here is during extension initialisation, where we write into
> > and read back register values from the buffer, but that is performed only
> > once for the first context - and baring synchronisation issues should not
> > be a problem. Safer would be to move that also to the screen.)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_pipe_control.c | 6 +++---
> > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.c | 4 ++++
> > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_pipe_control.c
> > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_pipe_control.c
> > index 7ee3cb6..05e14cd 100644
> > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_pipe_control.c
> > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_pipe_control.c
> > @@ -341,12 +341,12 @@ brw_init_pipe_control(struct brw_context *brw,
> > * the gen6 workaround because it involves actually writing to
> > * the buffer, and the kernel doesn't let us write to the batch.
> > */
> > - brw->workaround_bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc(brw->bufmgr,
> > - "pipe_control workaround",
> > - 4096, 4096);
> > + brw->workaround_bo = brw->intelScreen->workaround_bo;
> > if (brw->workaround_bo == NULL)
> > return -ENOMEM;
>
> Checking for out-of-memory conditions in code that doesn't actually
> allocate anything looks funky now. I'd be inclined just to drop the
> -ENOMEM path and make this a void function.
>
> Alternatively, you could just fold this into the brw_context setup and
> ditch the functions altogether. Up to you.
Ok, will refactor this since the check should now be at the screen.
> >
> > + drm_intel_bo_reference(brw->workaround_bo);
> > +
> > brw->pipe_controls_since_last_cs_stall = 0;
> >
> > return 0;
> > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.c
> > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.c
> > index 839a984..cd8e6eb 100644
> > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.c
> > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_screen.c
> > @@ -961,6 +961,7 @@ intelDestroyScreen(__DRIscreen * sPriv)
> > {
> > struct intel_screen *intelScreen = sPriv->driverPrivate;
> >
> > + drm_intel_bo_unreference(intelScreen->workaround_bo);
> > dri_bufmgr_destroy(intelScreen->bufmgr);
> > driDestroyOptionInfo(&intelScreen->optionCache);
> >
> > @@ -1096,6 +1097,9 @@ intel_init_bufmgr(struct intel_screen *intelScreen)
> > return false;
> > }
> >
> > + intelScreen->workaround_bo =
> > + drm_intel_bo_alloc(intelScreen->bufmgr, "pipe_control w/a", 4096,
> > 4096);
> > +
>
> Seems a little funny to put this in intel_init_bufmgr, since it's not
> setting up libdrm - why not put it in the caller?
No reason. I was considering this to be global state associated with the
bufmgr so just liked to keep it together.
Thanks,
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
