Quoting Ville Syrjala (2018-06-18 18:39:43) > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > My IVB hits the SYNC_COPY assert in prefer_blt_copy() when I force the > use of the software cursor and I move the cursor on top of a dri2 > window. Looks like any platform with sna_wait_for_scanline() implemented > should be capable of tripping this assert. > > Let's just replace the assert with a check, which is what gen6 already > does. IVB/HSW/BDW have sna_wait_for_scanline() so we'll have to change > the gen7 and gen8 code at least. gen9+ doesn't have sna_wait_for_scanline() > so in theory we could leave that one be, but I like consistency so let's > change that one too. Hmm, my memory says that the assertion was concerned with making sure the wait-for-event + copy operation was in the same batch. At any rate it seems like the swcursor is breaking a few of my assumptions, so before acting I'd like to tidy up the validation logic to check if it is not working as intended. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
