[PATCH 1/3] drm/amdgpu: fix a typo

[zhoucm1]

On 2017年06月23日 17:01, zhoucm1 wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年06月23日 16:25, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 23.06.2017 um 09:09 schrieb zhoucm1:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017年06月23日 14:57, Christian König wrote:
>>>> But giving the CS IOCTL an option for directly specifying the BOs 
>>>> instead of a BO list like Marek suggested would indeed save us some 
>>>> time here. 
>>> interesting, I always follow how to improve our cs ioctl, since UMD 
>>> guys aften complain our command submission is slower than windows.
>>> Then how to directly specifying the BOs instead of a BO list? BO 
>>> handle array from UMD? Could your guys describe more clear? Is it 
>>> doable?
>>
>> Making the BO list part of the CS IOCTL wouldn't help at all for the 
>> close source UMDs. To be precise we actually came up with the BO list 
>> approach because of their requirement.
>>
>> The biggest bunch of work during CS is reserving all the buffers, 
>> validating them and checking their VM status. 
> Totally agree. Every time when I read code there, I often want to 
> optimize them.
>
>> It doesn't matter if the BOs come from the BO list or directly in the 
>> CS IOCTL.
>>
>> The key point is that CS overhead is pretty much irrelevant for the 
>> open source stack, since Mesa does command submission from a separate 
>> thread anyway.
> If irrelevant for the open stack, then how does open source stack 
> handle "The biggest bunch of work during CS is reserving all the 
> buffers, validating them and checking their VM status."?
> If open stack has a better way, I think closed stack can follow it, I 
> don't know the history.
Do you not use bo list at all in mesa? radv as well?

Regards,
David Zhou
>
> Regards,
> David Zhou
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> David Zhou
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx