On 25/11/16 06:06 AM, Christian König wrote: > Well Serguei send me a couple of documents about QPI when we started to > discuss this internally as well and that's exactly one of the cases I > had in mind when writing this. > > If I understood it correctly for such systems P2P is technical possible, > but not necessary a good idea. Usually it is faster to just use a > bouncing buffer when the peers are a bit "father" apart. > > That this problem is solved on newer hardware is good, but doesn't helps > us at all if we at want to support at least systems from the last five > years or so. Well we have been testing with Sandy Bridge, I think the problem was supposed to be fixed in Ivy but we never tested it so I can't say what the performance turned out to be. Ivy is nearly 5 years old. I expect this is something that will be improved more and more with subsequent generations. A white list may end up being rather complicated if it has to cover different CPU generations and system architectures. I feel this is a decision user space could easily make. Logan _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
