From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] split render engine batch buffer and BLT engine Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 09:37:46 +0100 Message-ID: <5b55a1$ifjqlb@fmsmga002.fm.intel.com> References: <1288078396-6002-1-git-send-email-nanhai.zou@intel.com> <41EFD7A46E18724CAB128DAD0073348018E24C713F@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> <41EFD7A46E18724CAB128DAD0073348018E24C7162@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921639E819 for ; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 01:37:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <41EFD7A46E18724CAB128DAD0073348018E24C7162@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: "Zou, Nanhai" "Zou, Nanhai" , "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 16:31:47 +0800, "Zou, Nanhai" wrote: > Even if we can implement the batch buffer in a modal way. > I think it is not the best usage model. > Render engine and BLT engine are separate engines on gen6+. > For them to run one by one will not maximum the GPU usage. What usage pattern are you designing for? The most common pattern I've seen is for short intermixed operations on a connected set of buffers. So just what is the average length of the concurrent batch buffers (with correct inter-ring flushing) versus a much simpler modal approach? And do you have any x11perf figures yet? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre