Daniel, Matt,
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:24:55PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:57:32PM -0800, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
> > all,
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 06:48:42AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 08:40:24AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
> > > >
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:41:46AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Chris Wilson
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:53:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> Yeah that's kind the big behaviour difference (at least as I see it)
> >> between explicit sync and impli
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:57:32PM -0800, Jeremiah Mahler wrote:
> all,
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 06:48:42AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 08:40:24AM -0800, Matt Roper wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:04:04AM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 201
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Tvrtko Ursulin
wrote:
> Could you please translate this into something understandable by newcomers?
> :)
I don't know which parts are confusing without questions so please ask
them ... the questions below about scheduler interactions seem fairly
advanced ;-)
> In
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:53:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> Yeah that's kind the big behaviour difference (at least as I see it)
>> between explicit sync and implicit sync:
>> - with implicit sync the kernel attachs sync points/requests
