On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Marek Olšák <maraeo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The calculation led to the number 8192, which is too high.
Looks good.
Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> radeon/radeon_surface.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/radeon/radeon_surface.c b/radeon/radeon_surface.c
> index 66c2444..eb587d2 100644
> --- a/radeon/radeon_surface.c
> +++ b/radeon/radeon_surface.c
> @@ -939,6 +939,8 @@ static int eg_surface_best(struct radeon_surface_manager *surf_man,
> } else {
> /* tile split must be >= 256 for colorbuffer surfaces */
> surf->tile_split = MAX2(surf->nsamples * surf->bpe * 64, 256);
> + if (surf->tile_split > 4096)
> + surf->tile_split = 4096;
> }
> } else {
> /* set tile split to row size */
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
