Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Add soft-pinning API for execbuffer

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 01:59:12PM +0000, Daniel, Thomas wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chris Wilson [mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 6, 2015 11:53 AM
> > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > Cc: Chris Wilson; Daniel, Thomas
> > Subject: [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: Add soft-pinning API for execbuffer
> > 
> > Userspace can pass in an offset that it presumes the object is located
> > at. The kernel will then do its utmost to fit the object into that
> > location. The assumption is that userspace is handling its own object
> > locations (for example along with full-ppgtt) and that the kernel will
> > rarely have to make space for the user's requests.
> > 
> > v2: Fix i915_gem_evict_range() (now evict_for_vma) to handle ordinary
> > and fixed objects within the same batch
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: "Daniel, Thomas" <thomas.daniel@intel.com>
> 
> This didn't apply cleanly to my tree pulled today (after patches 1 and 2 of this series).
> Are you going to post a rebase?

It's a really trivial conflict in the uapi flag allocation. Happens all
the time with interface extensions.

What I'm looking for here is the userspace for this new interface. And the
testcases.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx