On 7/17/2014 5:25 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 05:22:38PM +0100, daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx>
The context used to execute a batchbuffer is becoming increasingly
important. Duplicating to avoid modifications to the original trace.
I am sure we don't want both. The structure encoding is exposed to
userspace so we are free to update the tracepoints within reason.
As you can see by the next patch in the series, I plan to add a callback
inside the trace. My original patch modified the existing trace, but (if
I've understood correctly) Daniel asked for a duplicated trace to avoid
adding the callback into the existing one.
I would also like a better ctx identifier than its pointer. Using the
pointer for tracking objects makes it more difficult to read traces
(although it is easy for scripts).
I use the VM pointer to track the ppgtt; that pointer is also printed by
several other traces, including the ppgtt init/release ones that I've
submitted for comments in this series. However, I don't mind changing
the way we identify the ctx as long as I still have access to the VM
pointer. I'll have a look at the possible ways of identifying the ctx
and I'll try to find a better solution than the current one.
thanks,
Daniele
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
