Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
-Summary-
Platform: baseline_drm_intel_nightly_pass_rate->patch_applied_pass_rate
BYT: pass/total=291/291->284/291
PNV: pass/total=356/356->350
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 04:57:10PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä
>
> Currently it's possible to get visible cache dirt on scanout on LLC
> machines when using pwrite on the future scanout bo if its cache_level
> is already NONE.
>
> pwrite's "does this need cl
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 03:01:30PM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 04:57:10PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä
> >
> > Currently it's possible to get visible cache dirt on scanout on LLC
> > machines when using pwrite on the future scanout b
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 04:57:10PM +0200, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä
>
> Currently it's possible to get visible cache dirt on scanout on LLC
> machines when using pwrite on the future scanout bo if its cache_level
> is already NONE.
>
> pwrite's "does this need cl
From: Ville Syrjälä
Currently it's possible to get visible cache dirt on scanout on LLC
machines when using pwrite on the future scanout bo if its cache_level
is already NONE.
pwrite's "does this need clflush?" checks would decide that no clflush
is necessary since the bo isn't currently pinned
