On 4 June 2012 14:43, Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> Based off of a patch from Ken Graunke. I just modified it for a more
> modern mesa (also don't allow contexts on blit ring).
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net>
> ---
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.c | 1 +
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vtbl.c | 5 ++++-
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_batchbuffer.c | 9 +++++++--
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.c | 2 ++
> src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.h | 2 +-
> 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.c
> index f7073cd..d4159c7 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_context.c
> @@ -298,6 +298,7 @@ brwCreateContext(int api,
>
> brw->prim_restart.in_progress = false;
> brw->prim_restart.enable_cut_index = false;
> + intel->hw_ctx = drm_intel_gem_context_create(intel->bufmgr);
>
> brw_init_state( brw );
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vtbl.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vtbl.c
> index 5699749..d9fd2cb 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vtbl.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_vtbl.c
> @@ -170,7 +170,10 @@ static void brw_new_batch( struct intel_context
> *intel )
> * This is probably not as severe as on 915, since almost all of our
> state
> * is just in referenced buffers.
> */
> - brw->state.dirty.brw |= BRW_NEW_CONTEXT | BRW_NEW_BATCH;
> + if (intel->hw_ctx == NULL)
> + brw->state.dirty.brw |= BRW_NEW_CONTEXT;
> +
> + brw->state.dirty.brw |= BRW_NEW_BATCH;
>
The comment above this change ("Mark all context state as needing to be
re-emitted.") is no longer accurate. Perhaps change it to something like
this?
"If the kernel supports hardware contexts, then most hardware state is
preserved between batches; we only need to re-emit state that is required
to be in every batch. Otherwise we need to re-emit all the state that
would otherwise be stored in the context (which for all intents and
purposes means everything)."
Also, I think it would be ok to delete the comment "This is probably not as
severe as on 915 ... referenced buffers"--that comment is mostly just a
rationalization for not having implemented hardware context support
earlier, and not a very convincing one at that :)
>
> /* Assume that the last command before the start of our batch was a
> * primitive, for safety.
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_batchbuffer.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_batchbuffer.c
> index 76a69f7..7ba141d 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_batchbuffer.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_batchbuffer.c
> @@ -188,8 +188,13 @@ do_flush_locked(struct intel_context *intel)
> if (ret == 0) {
> if (unlikely(INTEL_DEBUG & DEBUG_AUB) && intel->vtbl.annotate_aub)
> intel->vtbl.annotate_aub(intel);
> - ret = drm_intel_bo_mrb_exec(batch->bo, 4*batch->used, NULL, 0, 0,
> - flags);
> + if (intel->hw_ctx == NULL || batch->is_blit) {
> + ret = drm_intel_bo_mrb_exec(batch->bo, 4*batch->used, NULL, 0,
> 0,
> + flags);
> + } else {
> + ret = drm_intel_gem_bo_context_exec(batch->bo, intel->hw_ctx,
> + 4 * batch->used, flags);
> + }
> }
> }
>
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.c
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.c
> index 9deb4ca..46c2492 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.c
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.c
> @@ -593,6 +593,8 @@ intelInitContext(struct intel_context *intel,
> if (intelScreen->bufmgr == NULL)
> return false;
>
> + intel->hw_ctx = NULL;
> +
> /* Can't rely on invalidate events, fall back to glViewport hack */
> if (!driContextPriv->driScreenPriv->dri2.useInvalidate) {
> intel->saved_viewport = functions->Viewport;
> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.h
> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.h
> index cc3ee0d..c026fea 100644
> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.h
> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/intel/intel_context.h
> @@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ struct intel_context
> int urb_size;
>
> struct intel_batchbuffer batch;
> -
> + drm_intel_context *hw_ctx;
> drm_intel_bo *first_post_swapbuffers_batch;
> bool need_throttle;
> bool no_batch_wrap;
> --
> 1.7.10.2
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
I'm kind of surprised to see a call to drm_intel_gem_context_create(), but
no call anywhere to a clean-up function that destroys the context. Was
that an oversight, or is there a reason why it's unnecessary? If it's the
latter, a comment in brw_destroy_context() would be helpful.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20120604/440ec69f/attachment.htm>
