On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 11:28:05AM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On 02/18/2016 06:26 AM, John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > MMIO flips are the preferred mechanism now Because introducing variable latency in waking up a big core is a good idea? > but more importantly, pipe > > based flips cause issues for the scheduler. Specifically, submitting > > work to the rings around the side of the scheduler could cause that > > work to be lost if the scheduler generates a pre-emption event on that > > ring. No. That is just incredibily bad design. > Why can't we use mmio flips unconditionally? Maarten or Ville? Why would we want to? CS flips work just fine in execlists and no reason was ever given as to why they were not enabled, just laziness. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
