On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 08:17:32AM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 02:19:42PM +0100, Rutkowski, Adam J wrote: > > Having said all this, how about restoring the pin_ioctl? At least for > > some time? We do have a use case and moving to other - better - > > solution would take time. I think backward compatibility is something > > that you take into consideration as well. > > So, I just sent a patch reverting the change. Daniel will have an > opinion about this I'm sure, being the original author. Let see what > happens when he's back from holidays. > > Cheers, > > -- > Damien Just a note for a future ppgtt people - this adds another way to get multiple VMAs for a single BO. To this point, it had only been flink, and dmabuf. IIRC there are few unhandled corner cases for this. Also note that if the BO is still referenced within a batch, we need the flag to tell us it needs global binding. FWIW, I remain in favor of the relocation idea unless someone already expressed why we need multiple processes to have the relocation info. -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
