Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-09-19 09:38:54)
> Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 21:44:57)
> > On Monday, September 18, 2017 11:14:35 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 18:56:57)
> > > > @@ -904,13 +914,6 @@ _intel_batchbuffer_flush_fence(struct brw_context
> > >
Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 21:44:57)
> On Monday, September 18, 2017 11:14:35 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 18:56:57)
> > > brw_finish_batch emits commands needed at the end of every batch buffer,
> > > including any workarounds. In the past, we freed
On Monday, September 18, 2017 11:14:35 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 18:56:57)
> > brw_finish_batch emits commands needed at the end of every batch buffer,
> > including any workarounds. In the past, we freed up some "reserved"
> > batch space before calling it,
Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-09-18 18:56:57)
> brw_finish_batch emits commands needed at the end of every batch buffer,
> including any workarounds. In the past, we freed up some "reserved"
> batch space before calling it, so we would never have to flush during
> it. This was error prone and eas
brw_finish_batch emits commands needed at the end of every batch buffer,
including any workarounds. In the past, we freed up some "reserved"
batch space before calling it, so we would never have to flush during
it. This was error prone and easy to screw up, so I deleted it a while
back in favor o
