On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:43:58PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> These are my numbers for a beefy haswell box (note the really
> interesting numbers will be on Baytrail):
>
> unpatched:
>
> relocation: buffers= 1: old= 21945 + 34.4*reloc, lut= 21814 + 34.0*reloc
> (ns)
> relocation: buffers=
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 06:11:59PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 06:09:09PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > From: Ben Widawsky
> >
> > In order to transition more of our code over to using a VMA instead of
> > an pair - we must have the vma accessible at execbuf time. Up
>
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 06:09:09PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> From: Ben Widawsky
>
> In order to transition more of our code over to using a VMA instead of
> an pair - we must have the vma accessible at execbuf time. Up
> until now, we've only had a VMA when actually binding an object.
>
> Th
From: Ben Widawsky
In order to transition more of our code over to using a VMA instead of
an pair - we must have the vma accessible at execbuf time. Up
until now, we've only had a VMA when actually binding an object.
The previous patch helped handle the distinction on bound vs. unbound.
This pa
