On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 12:44:17PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 04:24:45PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > That doesn't fit the out-of-order unbound nature of the interface. The > > interface is just a collection of fences that userspace associates with > > the buffer that it may signal at any time. (Having no strict timeline is > > an advantage!) > > Fences on the same timeline are supposed to be signalled in-order. If you > want full out-of-order fences then you need to grab a new timeline number > for each one. Drivers can and do merge fences on the same timeline and > just carry the one with the largest seqno around. Ugh. Timelines simply don't mean anything everywhere - a very leaky abstration. Nevertheless, a fence_context per vgem_fence would do the trick. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
