Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-04-25 10:30:51)
> Related, there could be potential to unify i915_request_retire_upto and
> ring_retire_requests. Latter could pass in NULL as the upto request,
> just the completed check would need to be different depending on the mode.
Also remember that _upto is t
On 24/04/2018 15:57, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-04-24 15:46:49)
On 24/04/2018 14:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we ma
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-04-24 15:46:49)
>
> On 24/04/2018 14:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
> > between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
> > engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a
On 24/04/2018 15:46, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 24/04/2018 14:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the
On 24/04/2018 14:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the ring now
occurs along multiple engines), lead
Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-04-24 14:14:11)
> In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
> between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
> engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the ring now
> occurs along multiple engines
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the ring now
occurs along multiple engines), leading to much hilarity in miscomputing
the pos
On 23/04/2018 11:13, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the ring now
occurs along multiple engines), lead
In the next patch, rings are the central timeline as requests may jump
between engines. Therefore in the future as we retire in order along the
engine timeline, we may retire out-of-order within a ring (as the ring now
occurs along multiple engines), leading to much hilarity in miscomputing
the pos
