On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 05:19:04PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > 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. Well whatever it is, it better exists before I'm pulling this series in ... And scratch would be good since then it doesn't matter if we totally nuke the contents on hibernate when the gpu is idled. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
