On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Axel Davy wrote:
> On 10/10/2015 17:49, Marek Olšák wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Marek,
>>>
>>> The revised series is mostly done. I wanted to do more testing and to
>>> try to make sure that the added cache
On 10/10/2015 17:49, Marek Olšák wrote:
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
Hi Marek,
The revised series is mostly done. I wanted to do more testing and to
try to make sure that the added cache flushes I am doing now (a
CACHE_FLUSH event before a fast clear and on switchi
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
> wrote:
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> The revised series is mostly done. I wanted to do more testing and to
>> try to make sure that the added cache flushes I am doing now (a
>> CACHE_FLUSH event before
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> The revised series is mostly done. I wanted to do more testing and to
> try to make sure that the added cache flushes I am doing now (a
> CACHE_FLUSH event before a fast clear and on switching framebuffers)
> are the minimal
Hi Marek,
The revised series is mostly done. I wanted to do more testing and to
try to make sure that the added cache flushes I am doing now (a
CACHE_FLUSH event before a fast clear and on switching framebuffers)
are the minimal needed.
> Also, it looks like we don't need DCC decompression at all
Hi Bas,
How's it going?
I've gotten a response from Catalyst devs and they're saying CMASK is
unnecessary here. If it's always cleared to 0xff, it's better to
disable it to save some bandwidth.
Also, it looks like we don't need DCC decompression at all, right? It
might be better to get rid of it
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> On Thursday, September 24, 2015 07:24:50 PM Marek Olšák wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
>>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Marek,
>> >
>> > Thanks for the review and my apologies, it seems I underestimated the
>> > potenti
On Thursday, September 24, 2015 07:24:50 PM Marek Olšák wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
>
> wrote:
> > Hi Marek,
> >
> > Thanks for the review and my apologies, it seems I underestimated the
> > potential for regressions in this series.
> >
> > See below for some com
On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> Thanks for the review and my apologies, it seems I underestimated the
> potential for regressions in this series.
>
> See below for some comments in reaction to the review.
>
> For a v2 is it preferred that I rebase it to ma
Hi Marek,
Thanks for the review and my apologies, it seems I underestimated the
potential for regressions in this series.
See below for some comments in reaction to the review.
For a v2 is it preferred that I rebase it to master, or keep basing it on the
old version? There are some function re
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Bas Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> The flags to be enabled in the control registers have been taken from
> Catalyst traces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bas Nieuwenhuizen
> ---
> src/gallium/drivers/radeon/r600_pipe_common.h | 1 +
> src/gallium/drivers/radeon/r600_texture.c |
The flags to be enabled in the control registers have been taken from
Catalyst traces.
Signed-off-by: Bas Nieuwenhuizen
---
src/gallium/drivers/radeon/r600_pipe_common.h | 1 +
src/gallium/drivers/radeon/r600_texture.c | 2 ++
src/gallium/drivers/radeon/r600d_common.h | 1 +
src/galli
12 matches
Mail list logo
