Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-04-23 13:33:04) > > On 23/04/2018 11:13, Chris Wilson wrote: > > We need to move to a more flexible timeline that doesn't assume one > > fence context per engine, and so allow for a single timeline to be used > > across a combination of engines. This means that preallocating a fence > > context per engine is now a hindrance, and so we want to introduce the > > singular timeline. From the code perspective, this has the notable > > advantage of clearing up a lot of mirky semantics and some clumsy > > pointer chasing. > > > > By splitting the timeline up into a single entity rather than an array > > of per-engine timelines, we can realise the goal of the previous patch > > of tracking the timeline alongside the ring. > > Isn't single fence context and a single seqno space breaking the ABI? > Submissions from a context are now serialized across all engines. I am > thinking about await and dependency created in __i915_add_request to > timeline->last_request. It's still one per engine, the ABI shouldn't have changed unless I've screwed up. I now I wrote some tests to assert the independence... But probably only have those for the new ABI we were discussing. I guess I should make sure gem_exec_schedule is covering it. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
