On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 10:34:29AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 11:25:46AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 02:41:08PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Once again, the CPU PAT bits are irrelevant when considering the GPU
> > > cacheing, and context obj
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 11:25:46AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 02:41:08PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Once again, the CPU PAT bits are irrelevant when considering the GPU
> > cacheing, and context objects are never accessed from the CPU or
> > directly by userspace maki
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 02:41:08PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Once again, the CPU PAT bits are irrelevant when considering the GPU
> cacheing, and context objects are never accessed from the CPU or
> directly by userspace making them another ideal candidate to allocate
> from stolen memory.
>
>
Once again, the CPU PAT bits are irrelevant when considering the GPU
cacheing, and context objects are never accessed from the CPU or
directly by userspace making them another ideal candidate to allocate
from stolen memory.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c
