On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 17:40 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 15:08 -0800, Keith Packard wrote: > > This limits application memory usage by waiting for the GPU to free memory > > rather than simply continuing to allocate more memory. > > I think I theoretically prefer the current behavior in the presence of > max_entries where you still alloc a new buffer (so you're not syncing) > but you free the buffer being unreferenced instead of adding it to the > cache.
The goal here was to limit 'extra' memory allocated by an application to a fixed (huge) amount. > Of course, I haven't run with max_entries yet since we shouldn't need > it. Right. Before your kernel patch to return flushing buffers as not-busy, I was using this to avoid blowing up the X server. I'm OK with not including this if we can get the kernel patch landed. -- [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
-- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
