From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Zhigang Gong" Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] glamor: Route fillspans and polyfillrects to glamor. Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:48:57 +0800 Message-ID: <056b01cca05f$8478fa80$8d6aef80$@linux.intel.com> References: <1321000281-5097-1-git-send-email-zhigang.gong@linux.intel.com> <1321000281-5097-3-git-send-email-zhigang.gong@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [143.182.124.21]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD439E86C for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 02:49:02 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: zh-cn 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: 'Chris Wilson' , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk] > Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 5:08 PM > To: Zhigang Gong; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] glamor: Route fillspans and polyfillrects > to glamor. > > On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 16:31:21 +0800, Zhigang Gong > wrote: > > If GLAMOR is enabled, we route UXA's fillspans and polyfillrects to > > glamor by default. And if glamor fail to accelerate it, UXA continue > > to handle it. > > How is serialisation handled between the UXA and glamor acceleration > routines? Don't you need to flush the UXA batch (if the pixmap is active) > before handing over to glamor and similarly flush the glamor pixmap after > failure? Thanks for pointing this issue out. This is something I want to be discussed here. There are three types of access to the pixmap: 1. UXA batch command buffer. 2. Glamor through OpenGL 3. CPU access mapped BO buffer. My understanding is that the leading two types has the queue mechanism and need to be handled carefully. In general, we can treat glamor 's access as another batch buffer. Then in the place where current intel driver need to flush UXA batch buffer, we also need to flush the GL operations there. Right? And besides above places we need to flush glamor, we also need to flush UXA batch buffer before call into glamor and also need to flush glamor after the glamor rendering function really touch the pixmap. Any comments? > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre