On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jero
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> This looks go
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
This looks good to me. It's funny to see the r300g architecture being
>>
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 4:10 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>>> This looks good to me. It's funny to see the r300g architecture being
>>> re-implemented in r600g. :)
>>>
>>> There's one optimizati
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
>> This looks good to me. It's funny to see the r300g architecture being
>> re-implemented in r600g. :)
>>
>> There's one optimization that r300g has that this patch doesn't. r300g
>> keeps t
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> This looks good to me. It's funny to see the r300g architecture being
> re-implemented in r600g. :)
>
> There's one optimization that r300g has that this patch doesn't. r300g
> keeps the index of the first and the last dirty atom and the loops
>
This looks good to me. It's funny to see the r300g architecture being
re-implemented in r600g. :)
There's one optimization that r300g has that this patch doesn't. r300g
keeps the index of the first and the last dirty atom and the loops
over the list of atoms look like this:
for (i = first_dirty; i
Am 06.09.2012 16:54, schrieb Jerome Glisse:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>>> On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse
To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a
On 06.09.2012 18:06, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jero
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>>> On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Jerome Glisse
To avoid GPU lockup registers must be e
From: Jerome Glisse
To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a specific order
(no kidding ...). This patch rework atom emission so order in which
atom are emited in respect to each other is always the same. We
don't have any informations on what is the correct order so order
will need to b
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
>> On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>>
>>> To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a specific order
>>> (no kidding ...). This patch rew
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
> On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Jerome Glisse
>>
>> To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a specific order
>> (no kidding ...). This patch rework atom emission so order in which
>> atom are emited in r
On 06.09.2012 07:35, j.gli...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Jerome Glisse
>
> To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a specific order
> (no kidding ...). This patch rework atom emission so order in which
> atom are emited in respect to each other is always the same. We
> don't have any inform
From: Jerome Glisse
To avoid GPU lockup registers must be emited in a specific order
(no kidding ...). This patch rework atom emission so order in which
atom are emited in respect to each other is always the same. We
don't have any informations on what is the correct order so order
will need to b
17 matches
Mail list logo
