On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 01:21:19PM +, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 02:33:48PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 07:59:10PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > Implements a required workaround whose implications aren't entirely clear
> > > to me
> > > from
On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 02:33:48PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 07:59:10PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Implements a required workaround whose implications aren't entirely clear
> > to me
> > from the description. In particular I do not know if this effects legacy
> > co
On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 07:59:10PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Implements a required workaround whose implications aren't entirely clear to
> me
> from the description. In particular I do not know if this effects legacy
> contexts, execlists, or both.
>
> I couldn't find a real workaround name,
Implements a required workaround whose implications aren't entirely clear to me
from the description. In particular I do not know if this effects legacy
contexts, execlists, or both.
I couldn't find a real workaround name, so I made up:
WaHdcCtxNonCoherent
Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky
---
driver
