Re: [PATCH v3] Do we need to posting-read after ggtt insert-page?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Do we need to posting-read after ggtt insert-page?
From: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 15:14:50 +0100
In-reply-to: <20190823141409.2216-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
References: <20190823132700.25286-3-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> <20190823141409.2216-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
User-agent: alot/0.6

Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-08-23 15:14:09)
> See gem_set_tiling_vs_pwrite/vs_blit

Yeah, I'm not having a good day.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

References:
- [PATCH 02/15] drm/i915/gtt: Preallocate Braswell top-level page directory
  - From: Chris Wilson
- [PATCH v3] Do we need to posting-read after ggtt insert-page?
  - From: Chris Wilson

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] drm: port definition is moved back into i915 header
Next by Date: ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Align power domain names with port names (rev2)
Previous by thread: [PATCH v3] Do we need to posting-read after ggtt insert-page?
Next by thread: [PATCH 14/15] drm/i915: Drop struct_mutex from around i915_retire_requests()
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [AMD Graphics] [Linux USB Devel] [Linux Audio Users] [Yosemite News] [Linux Kernel] [Linux SCSI]

Powered by Linux