From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Anholt Subject: Re: Improvements and fixes for Intel ddx swap scheduling/timestamping. Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2012 09:08:38 -0700 Message-ID: <878vbhymih.fsf@eliezer.anholt.net> References: <1349591890-13732-1-git-send-email-mario.kleiner@tuebingen.mpg.de> <20121008080047.GA6116@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0294083891==" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121008080047.GA6116@phenom.ffwll.local> 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: Daniel Vetter , Mario Kleiner Cc: daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org --===============0294083891== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Daniel Vetter writes: > On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 08:38:07AM +0200, Mario Kleiner wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> a series of three patches to improve the dri2 swap scheduling >> and timestamping for the current intel ddx. >>=20 >> The first one enables proper OML_sync_control timestamping >> while triple-buffering is enabled and XOrg 1.12+ with DRI2SwapLimit >> support is in use. So far, timestamping was unuseable with >> triple-buffering, only worked with double-buffering. >>=20 >> The second one repairs the broken pageflip swap scheduling, which >> is apparently in a frightening state for timing sensitive apps >> since a year, due to a tiny but really ugly bug. In a perfect >> implementation of Murphy's law, the same commit that broke the >> scheduling also disabled the builtin correctness checks that >> were supposed to catch such bugs. >>=20 >> The third one proposes to revert 'SwapBuffersWait' to its old >> behaviour where it didn't affect pageflipping. I just can't >> think of a case where the current behaviour makes any sense, not >> even for benchmarking? But maybe i'm overlooking something. >>=20 >> All patches were tested against an Intel 945-GME gpu. >>=20 >> I don't really care about the 'SwapBuffersWait' patch one way >> or the other, but the first two are crucial to make the intel >> ddx useable in a painless and safe way again for users of >> timing sensitive applications. > > This kind of regressions suck. Are there no tests (in piglit) that check > OML buffer swap and timestamping behaviour at least internally? Or could I > volunteer you to create that? Toghether with the new kernel flip tests > this should catch any further such regressions ... I posted a first couple of tests that try to just hit the API for the most part, but I don't test the MSCs or wall-time timing behavior. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlBy+oYACgkQHUdvYGzw6vcdrgCfZe1h4+aBsAKwDVcNQs7s9Lnz l0UAnjgHq7sOESXqaKOQU9U38xsnkWt2 =kX00 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- --===============0294083891== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx --===============0294083891==--