On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:00:54AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 21/10/15 16:24, Chris Wilson wrote: > >Our GPUs impose certain requirements upon buffers that depend upon how > >exactly they are used. Typically this is expressed as that they require > >a larger surface than would be naively computed by pitch * height. > >Normally such requirements are hidden away in the userspace driver, but > >when we accept pointers from strangers and later impose extra conditions > >on them, the original client allocator has no idea about the > >monstrosities in the GPU and we require the userspace driver to inform > >the kernel how many padding pages are required beyond the client > >allocation. > > > >v2: Long time, no see > > > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > As mentioned by Chris, IGT can be found as "tests/gem_exec_pad_to_size: Test > object padding at execbuf", might need a respin for top-down allocation > policy change. Ah, so was just missing Testcase: line then. lgtm, Chris/Tvrtko please push. -Daniel > > And libdrm support is "libdrm_intel: Add API for execbuf pad to size > functionality". > > Both patches from April this year. > > Regards, > > Tvrtko > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- 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
