From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bugzilla-daemon@freedesktop.org Subject: [Bug 108311] Query buffer object support is broken on r600. Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 03:55:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1512538713==" Return-path: Received: from culpepper.freedesktop.org (culpepper.freedesktop.org [IPv6:2610:10:20:722:a800:ff:fe98:4b55]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD2D6E39F for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2018 03:55:46 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "dri-devel" To: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org --===============1512538713== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="15392301462.dB6B2E.28012" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --15392301462.dB6B2E.28012 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 03:55:46 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108311 --- Comment #2 from Andrew Wesie --- (In reply to Dave Airlie from comment #1) > Created attachment 141989 [details] [review] > set larger alignment for tmp buffer offset >=20 > Does this patch work as an alternate? It looks like it should work but I'll test it with real hw. Any reason you prefer this patch? It seems like it would use more heap space without any notable benefits (e.g. should it have better performance characteristics?). --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.= --15392301462.dB6B2E.28012 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 03:55:46 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated

Commen= t # 2 on bug 10831= 1 from = Andrew Wesie 
(In reply to Dave Airlie from comment #1)
> Created attachment 141989 [=
details] [review] [review]
> set larger alignment for tmp buffer offset
>=20
> Does this patch work as an alternate?

It looks like it should work but I'll test it with real hw.

Any reason you prefer this patch? It seems like it would use more heap space
without any notable benefits (e.g. should it have better performance
characteristics?).

You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
= --15392301462.dB6B2E.28012-- --===============1512538713== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KZHJpLWRldmVs IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdApkcmktZGV2ZWxAbGlzdHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnCmh0dHBzOi8vbGlz dHMuZnJlZWRlc2t0b3Aub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vZHJpLWRldmVsCg== --===============1512538713==--