On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 09:05:44PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Matthew Brost (2020-12-10 19:16:44) > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 08:02:38AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Relative timelines are relative to either the global or per-process > > > HWSP, and so we can replace the absolute addressing with store-index > > > variants for position invariance. > > > > > > > Can you explain the benifit of relative addressing? Why can't we also > > use absolute? If we can always use absolute, I don't see the point > > complicating the breadcrumb code. > > It basically allows a third party to move the contexts between hosts > with far less patching of global state. They want us to avoid all fixed > GGTT addressing. > > The breadcrumbs themselves do not notice at all, it's just the timeline > setup and decision to take advantage of the relative commands. The > breadcrumb patches in this series are some outstanding fixes from ~6 > months ago. By breadcrumbs, I meant the emit code. Relative addressing for GVT makes sense. With that, for this patch: Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@xxxxxxxxx> > -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
