On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 09:11:10AM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 03:16:09PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:46:38PM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > /* Generate a semi-unique er
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 03:16:09PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:46:38PM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > /* Generate a semi-unique error code. The code is not meant to have
> > > meaning, The
> > > @@ -
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:46:38PM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > /* Generate a semi-unique error code. The code is not meant to have
> > meaning, The
> > @@ -1085,7 +1083,6 @@ static void i915_gem_capture_vm(struct
> > drm_i915_pr
On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> /* Generate a semi-unique error code. The code is not meant to have meaning,
> The
> @@ -1085,7 +1083,6 @@ static void i915_gem_capture_vm(struct drm_i915_private
> *dev_priv,
> const int ndx)
> {
>
Somewhere between removing the pinned bo list and adding full ppgtt
support we've started to no longer filter the active buffers out of
the captured pinned buffers. I've tried to dig out exactly where but
didn't spot it.
At first I've thought (checked, but without warning about it) array
overrun.
Somewhere between removing the pinned bo list and adding full ppgtt
support we've started to no longer filter the active buffers out of
the captured pinned buffers. I've tried to dig out exactly where but
didn't spot it.
At first I've thought (checked, but without warning about it) array
overrun.
