On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:48:13PM +0100, chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 09:14:59PM +0000, Zanoni, Paulo R wrote: > > Em Qua, 2016-08-24 às 19:00 +0100, Chris Wilson escreveu: > > > . In the meantime lets hope that all > > > framebuffers are idle and naturally fit within the mappable aperture. > > > > What exactly do you mean with the sentence above? Is there some other > > bug you spotted? Please share the information. > > Not all framebuffers will be fenced, especially if they are being > rendered to before being flipped to the first time. The pressure is less > for full-ppgtt systems (now that we have independent activity tracking > on the vma) but that is not sufficient to guarrantee the object will be > assigned a map_and_fenceable VMA for display. Yeah, with unmappable scanout fbc might luck out a lot. Anyway, need to get the w/a and testing in place, on this revert meanwhile: Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
