Comment # 11
on bug 60028
from Dave Witbrodt
(In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #8) > > Would it be good for me to bisect Mesa? > > If Mesa commit 6532eb17baff6e61b427f29e076883f8941ae664 (where code > depending on DRM minor 26 was first introduced) doesn't leak, yes please. Because of work, I was going to wait until Friday to check this... but I found some time last night to give it a try. With my custom 3.7.4 kernel (+ post 3.7 Radeon-related commits up to Jan. 21) I built Mesa at commit 6532eb17 ... and that leaked memory as described before. I then built Mesa at one commit earlier (24b1206a), and the memory leak was gone. That's not the sort of help I hoped to provide.... > BTW, does setting the environment variable R600_HYPERZ=0 for the leaking > process(es) work around the problem? With up-to-date kernel and up-to-date Mesa (commit 02b6da1e of Jan. 29), using R600_HYPERZ=0 _does_ eliminate the memory leak. Of course, I am hoping to be _able_ to use the Hyper Z functionality, so I have to admit disappointment about having to use that workaround; but at least it allows me to use the rest of the DRI and Mesa changes since Dec. 19. Needless to say, I'm definitely willing to test further changes in the DRI and/or Mesa!
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
