On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 02:42:40PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
> not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
>
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 02:42:40PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
> not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
>
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 16:37:20 -0700
Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 02:42 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> > people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches.
> > If
> > not, you can search the
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 16:37:20 -0700
Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 02:42 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> > people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches.
> > If
> > not, you can search the
On 06/04/2012 02:42 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
> not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
> recap the whole th
On 06/04/2012 02:42 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
> people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
> not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
> recap the whole th
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 00:08:10 -0700
Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 10:53 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
> >
> > Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
> >
> > why should we merge all this code then :-)
> >
> >
On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 00:08:10 -0700
Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 10:53 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
> >
> > Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
> >
> > why should we merge all this code then :-)
> >
> >
>
> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
why should we merge all this code then :-)
Dave.
On 06/04/2012 10:53 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
>
> Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
>
> why should we merge all this code then :-)
>
> Dave.
Preserving hardware state across batches is going to be necessary for:
On 06/04/2012 10:53 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
>
> Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
>
> why should we merge all this code then :-)
>
> Dave.
Preserving hardware state across batches is going to be necessary for:
>
> I've run these on various workloads and saw nothing worth mentioning.
Nothing at all? no speedups, slowdowns, etc
why should we merge all this code then :-)
Dave.
___
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.o
Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
recap the whole thing here, and instead let the patches speak for them
Setting myself up for a late night crying session once again. Most of the
people reading this probably know the history and reasons for the patches. If
not, you can search the intel-gfx mailing list to try to learn more. I won't
recap the whole thing here, and instead let the patches speak for them
14 matches
Mail list logo
