On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 05:14:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > As far as users go, I'm dubious as to the merits of using stolen (and so > have not written patches for the ddx/mesa) simply because we do not have > CPU access to them and so that excludes using all of the fast paths and > general flexibility. And I have complications like if I allocate a buffer > from stolen I need to migrate it if it is exported to a client over > DRI2/DRI3 (because I can't communicate that it is not first class). For > internal auxiliary buffers (which aren't that many as they get recycled > quickly like vertex/batch/instruction/temporary buffers), the quandary is > to save a few hundred KiB of memory or stick to fast access along generic > paths. Typical, hit send and think of a use. Scratch for EU kernels - can be a few megabytes in size and do not need user access. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
