On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 10:56:43AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:15 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 04:09:32AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > That will hopefully catch which path is consuming too much time >> >> >> >> This is what I got: >> >> >> >> restarting timeout[2] (14, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[0] (16, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[0] (16, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[2] (14, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[1] (15, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[0] (16, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[0] (16, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[1] (15, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[1] (15, 0, 0) >> >> restarting timeout[-1] (17, 0, 0) >> > >> > Suspiciously like we block for an entire vrefresh to submit one batch. >> > Hmm, do you mind sending me your complete Xorg.0.log? >> >> Here you go. > > Oh, TearFree. That explains it. I plan to fix that up very soon. Cool. Any idea why this happens only in this game, and only in that exact loading screen? -- Felipe Contreras _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
