Op 17-04-15 om 21:22 schreef Dave Gordon:
> On 07/04/15 12:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> Op 07-04-15 om 12:59 schreef John Harrison:
>>> On 07/04/2015 10:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Hey,
Op 20-03-15 om 18:48 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
> From: John Harrison
On 07/04/15 12:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Op 07-04-15 om 12:59 schreef John Harrison:
>> On 07/04/2015 10:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Op 20-03-15 om 18:48 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
From: John Harrison
There is a construct in the linux kernel
Hey,
Op 07-04-15 om 12:59 schreef John Harrison:
> On 07/04/2015 10:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> Op 20-03-15 om 18:48 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
>>> From: John Harrison
>>>
>>> There is a construct in the linux kernel called 'struct fence' that is
>>> intended
>>> to keep t
On 07/04/2015 10:18, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
Hey,
Op 20-03-15 om 18:48 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
From: John Harrison
There is a construct in the linux kernel called 'struct fence' that is intended
to keep track of work that is executed on hardware. I.e. it solves the basic
problem t
Hey,
Op 20-03-15 om 18:48 schreef john.c.harri...@intel.com:
> From: John Harrison
>
> There is a construct in the linux kernel called 'struct fence' that is
> intended
> to keep track of work that is executed on hardware. I.e. it solves the basic
> problem that the drivers 'struct drm_i915_gem_
From: John Harrison
There is a construct in the linux kernel called 'struct fence' that is intended
to keep track of work that is executed on hardware. I.e. it solves the basic
problem that the drivers 'struct drm_i915_gem_request' is trying to address. The
request structure does quite a lot more
