On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 15:00:13 -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> If userspace asked for a timeout greater than zero, but less than a
> jiffy, they clearly weren't planning on spinning. So it is better
> to round up to one.
>
> This fixes an issue with supertuxkart that was (for some reason)
> spinning on
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 8:28 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
wrote:
>
> On 25/03/2023 00:00, Rob Clark wrote:
> > From: Rob Clark
> >
> > If userspace asked for a timeout greater than zero, but less than a
> > jiffy, they clearly weren't planning on spinning. So it is better
> > to round up to one.
> >
> >
On 25/03/2023 00:00, Rob Clark wrote:
From: Rob Clark
If userspace asked for a timeout greater than zero, but less than a
jiffy, they clearly weren't planning on spinning. So it is better
to round up to one.
This fixes an issue with supertuxkart that was (for some reason)
spinning on a gl syn
From: Rob Clark
If userspace asked for a timeout greater than zero, but less than a
jiffy, they clearly weren't planning on spinning. So it is better
to round up to one.
This fixes an issue with supertuxkart that was (for some reason)
spinning on a gl sync with 1ms timeout. CPU time for a demo
