On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:49:42PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > On 03/20/2014 04:34 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 03:59:17PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: > >> On 03/20/2014 03:36 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote: > >>> In any case this is not a render node issue and there is no reasons to force > >>> full VRAM eviction or anything like that. > >> This comment suggests you haven't read the discussion fully. > >> > >> VRAM eviction was discussed in the context of legacy nodes. > >> > >> This is a render node issue because with legacy nodes you can work > >> around insufficient command checking. > >> With render nodes you can't. > > On radeon you can not abuse the GPU period legacy node or not. My comment > > was about the fact that this is a driver issue and not a render node issue. > > I would consider driver that allow to abuse the GPU block to access any > > memory as broken no matter if we are talking about legacy or new render > > node. > > > > Cheers, > > Jérôme > > > > Great. Then I assume you don't have an issue with not enabling > render-nodes for those broken drivers, > (or at least a sysfs property or something similar flagging those device > nodes as broken)? > > Thanks, > Thomas > > Yes, broken driver should not have render node, at leadt in my view. Cheers, Jérôme _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
