On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 02:53:48PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > We can push down the decision whether to force flushing into the > implementation since in all places that matter obj->pin_display is > accurate already. The only place where the optimization really matters > is the sw_finish_ioctl, and that already checks for obj->pin_display > on its own. > > I suspect that this was simply an artifact of how > > commit 2c22569bba8af6c2976d5f9479fe54a53a39966b > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Fri Aug 9 12:26:45 2013 +0100 > > drm/i915: Update rules for writing through the LLC with the cpu > > evolved - only v2 added the pin_display tracking. > > Note that we still retain the gist of this logic from the above commit > with the explicit force argument for the low-level clflush function. > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
