Hi Chris,
First things first, vmap scares me. It's scariness is threefold:
- We haven't really used snooped memory seriously anywhere. And every time
we newly use hw features, stuff tends to blow up in hilarious ways.
- Using snooped memory is rather different than using uc gtt mappings and
ha
On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 10:32:41 +0100
Chris Wilson wrote:
> Knut Petersen reported a GPU hang when he left x11perf running
> overnight. The error state quite clearly indicates that plane A was
> enabled without being fully setup:
>
> PGTBL_ER: 0x0010
> Display A: Invalid GTT PTE
> Plane [0]
Chris:
Can you specify the commit this patch was built on top of? I'm still
not totally fluent in git. I did get it to apply cleanly but my build
attempt failed due to errors which suggest stuff is needed from other
commits missing from my build branch :-( For example,
"drm_mode_parse_comma
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 07:52:44AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:13:46 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Provide a reference count to track the forcewake state of the GPU. The
> > savings is up to 1 UC read if the unit is already awake, but the main
> > goal is to give userspace
Never mind. As usual the answer is right in front of my nose - the
other patch in this series. I was only focusing on the second patch not
the first one. D'Oh!
-Mike
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Mike Isely wrote:
>
> Chris:
>
> Can you specify the commit this patch was built on top of? I'm s
Dear Paul,
Thanks for your suggestion. http://intellinuxgraphics.org/vaapi.html has been
updated.
Hai Lan
> -Original Message-
> From: intel-gfx-bounces+hai.lan=intel@lists.freedesktop.org
> [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces+hai.lan=intel@lists.freedesktop.org] On
> Behalf Of Paul Menzel
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 10:31:43 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> I'll split the patches. I can also use the awake() variant for the
> existing users, if you're okay with the awake() function (I was actually
> expecting a comment from you on that). For the relevant functions, it
> should be as simple as:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:54:44 -0700, Jesse Barnes
wrote:
> I like it (though now the comment talks about DSPADDR and leaves
> DSPSURF out in the cold).
D'oh. That'll teach me to try and write a comment to explain a function
first!
> Sounds like our dpms code may be causing trouble for this x11pe
Thanks for excellent comments... Skipping to the end for a quick response:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:58:17 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> I have hopes that we might be able to subsume that use-case into the
> single-shot use-case by beefing up pwrite/read with a blt variant that
> does the right thin
