On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 09:15:41PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:18:57PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > Interesting, well, I had a look around and this means all sorts of "trouble" > > (refactoring) if proper wm param comparison is to be done. > > > > Alternatively, in (more) cheating via embedding knowledge approach, then > > rejecing a change in tiling is simple, but rotation is only known in plane > > state and page flip is not able to compare old vs. new. > > > > In fact, I don't even know if possible since plane properties and page flips > > look disjoint, each living in it's own timeline. If sampled when flip is > > queued it will be bad, if sampled with the flip then it is too late and/or > > properly slow. > > With atomic we can't do such tricks anymore anyway, we always have to > recompute the full state. We'll we could set dirty bits and similar tricks > to avoid recomputing some state and the corresponding setup, but imo that > needs to come with performance data attached. And atm pageflips are > limited to refresh rate. And in a helper process/thread. Though we need to be sure that it doesn't take more than a frame to queue a flip ;-) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
