Riley (CCed) and I will be at Plumbers in a couple weeks.
There is a session on sync planned in the Android track, and of course
we'll be available to chat.
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 05:59:51PM +0300, Lauri Peltonen wrote:
> > +Rom who seems
Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Maarten Lankhorst <
maarten.lankhorst at canonical.com> wrote:
> op 07-11-13 22:11, Rom Lemarchand schreef:
> > Hi Maarten, I tested your changes and needed the attached patch: behavior
> > now seems equivalent as android sync. I haven't teste
Let me run some benchmarks today, talk to people internally, and I'll let
you know.
On Nov 8, 2013 3:43 AM, "Maarten Lankhorst"
wrote:
> op 07-11-13 22:11, Rom Lemarchand schreef:
> > Hi Maarten, I tested your changes and needed the attached patch: behavior
> > n
Hi Maarten, I tested your changes and needed the attached patch: behavior
now seems equivalent as android sync. I haven't tested performance.
The issue resolved by this patch happens when i_b < b->num_fences and i_a
>= a->num_fences (or vice versa). Then, pt_a is invalid and so
dereferencing pt_a-
Sorry about the delay.
Hopefully other people from Android will also chime in.
We need the ability to merge sync fences and keep the sync_pt ordered: the
idea behind sync timelines is that we promise an ordering of operations.
Our reference device is Nexus 10: we need to make sure that any new
imp
