[Intel-gfx] [Glamor] [PATCH v2] uxa/glamor: Create glamor pixmap by default.
junyan.he at linux.intel.com
Wed Jan 11 22:56:21 PST 2012
Use XTS for basic check and passed.
No regression found.
Tested-by: He Junyan<junyan.he at linux.intel.com>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> glamor-bounces+zhigang.gong=linux.intel.com at lists.freedesktop.org
>> [mailto:glamor-bounces+zhigang.gong=linux.intel.com at lists.freedesktop.o
>> rg] On Behalf Of Chris Wilson
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 2:01 AM
>> To: zhigang.gong at gmail.com
>> Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org; zhigang.gong at linux.intel.com;
>> zhigang.gong at gmail.com; glamor at lists.freedesktop.org
>> Subject: Re: [Glamor] [PATCH v2] uxa/glamor: Create glamor pixmap by
>> On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:01:09 +0800, zhigang.gong at gmail.com wrote:
>>> From: Zhigang Gong<zhigang.gong at linux.intel.com>
>>> A minor fix, after convert the old pixmap to the textured-drm pixmap,
>>> we need to modify the old pixmap's header to make sure the
>>> width/height and stride are the same as the new textured-drm BO.
>> We can not just call FatalError there, but should just propagate the error
>> so that the client at least sees BadMatch and X doesn't simply die... How
> Agree. X server should not die for a unsupported client application. Maybe I
> can just change it to put a warning indicator there.
> As to propagate the error to client, I have no idea how to pass a BadMatch
> error To client.
> Just return the old texture_only pixmap, and the pixmap_flink will get a 0
> name, and then
> the client will get a 0 buffer name. If the client check the buffer name
> then it can
> find something bad happened. If it doesn't, then client may trigger a
> segfault which
> is what mutter does currently. Any hint here?
>> does this resolve the issue of mesa replacing a bo for a glamor pixmap
>> even though we've exported it? Or is that simply an orthogonal problem to
>> be tackled later?
> My understanding is for the texture which is bound to KHR Image by using
> EGLlImageTargetTexture2DOES, mesa will not replacing its BO to a new one.
> For those pure glamor pixmap, as we never export a pure glamor pixmap's BO,
> will not be a problem. The fixup_glamor will convert a texture only
> pixmap to a textured_drm pixmap eventually, then after we export its BO,
> mesa will not change it. Right?
>>> As create glamor pixmap by default will get much better performance by
>>> using the textured-drm pixmap, this commit is to make that the default
>>> behaviour when configure to use glamor.
>>> A side effect is that for those glamor pixmaps, they don't have a
>>> valid BO attached to it and thus it fails to get a DRI drawable. This
>>> commit also fixes that problem by copy the fixup_shadow mechanism. I
>>> tested this with mutter, and it seems work fine.
>>> The performance gain to apply this patch is about 20% to 40% with
>>> different workload.
>> Waiting to see if I get any results to support that claim... ;-) You can
>> mention that by using glamor to allocate the pixmaps, we reduce the risk
>> of encountering the "incompatible region exists for this name"
>> and the associated render corruption. Until that is resolved, every time
>> export a DRI pixmap and create a BO we still may trigger that bug.
> Yeah, will add that at v3 patch.
>> However, since we now never intentionally allocate a reusable pixmap we
>> could just make all (intel_glamor) allocations non-reusable without
>> incurring too great an overhead.
> Agree, will disable reusable when create textured_drm pixmap at v3 patch.
>> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
>> Glamor mailing list
>> Glamor at lists.freedesktop.org
> Glamor mailing list
> Glamor at lists.freedesktop.org
More information about the Intel-gfx