On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 04:29:57PM +0100, John Harrison wrote:
> On 26/08/2016 16:08, John Harrison wrote:
> >On 25/08/2016 10:08, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>Now that the user can opt-out of implicit fencing, we need to give them
> >>back control over the fencing. We employ sync_file to wrap our
> >>d
On 26/08/2016 16:08, John Harrison wrote:
On 25/08/2016 10:08, Chris Wilson wrote:
Now that the user can opt-out of implicit fencing, we need to give them
back control over the fencing. We employ sync_file to wrap our
drm_i915_gem_request and provide an fd that userspace can merge with
other syn
On 25/08/2016 10:08, Chris Wilson wrote:
Now that the user can opt-out of implicit fencing, we need to give them
back control over the fencing. We employ sync_file to wrap our
drm_i915_gem_request and provide an fd that userspace can merge with
other sync_file fds and pass back to the kernel to w
Now that the user can opt-out of implicit fencing, we need to give them
back control over the fencing. We employ sync_file to wrap our
drm_i915_gem_request and provide an fd that userspace can merge with
other sync_file fds and pass back to the kernel to wait upon before
future execution.
Testcase
