On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 8:49:25 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 16:33:48)
> > On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 5:26:10 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> > > > We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or
Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 16:33:48)
> On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 5:26:10 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> > > We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> > > reaches the original intended batch size, instead of whe
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 5:26:10 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> > We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> > reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when the sum of
> > the two reaches a certain size (which
On Wednesday, September 6, 2017 4:23:37 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-09-06 11:13:54)
> > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> > > We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> > > reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when t
Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when the sum of
> the two reaches a certain size (which makes no sense now that they're
> separate buffers).
>
> With this change
Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-09-06 11:13:54)
> Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> > We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> > reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when the sum of
> > the two reaches a certain size (which makes no sense now that
Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-06 01:09:50)
> We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
> reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when the sum of
> the two reaches a certain size (which makes no sense now that they're
> separate buffers).
>
> With this change
We now flush the batch when either the batchbuffer or statebuffer
reaches the original intended batch size, instead of when the sum of
the two reaches a certain size (which makes no sense now that they're
separate buffers).
With this change, we also need to update our "are we near the end?"
estima
