On Nov 18, 2016 2:55 PM, "Emil Velikov" <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > [Pardon for dropping in uninvited] > > On 15 November 2016 at 18:04, Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Immutable metadata (modifiers) stored in the kernel is the only > > scalable (and thus usable) solution here. There was an argument > > against _mutable_ metadata attached to BOs and the synchronization > > hell it can cause, but I've not seen any argument against _immutable_ > > metadata. Trying to push the metadata (modifiers) through window > > system protocols seems like a horrible idea to me, not just because of > > that fact that window system protocols shouldn't care about > > driver-specific stuff, but also because of the immense burden once you > > realize that you have to fix all window system protocols and KMS apps > > because 64 bits of metadata is not enough to support your hardware. > > It's clearly not economically sustainable. > > > Wasn't this one of the things that were [supposed to be] discussed at > XDC as part of the gbm2/liballoc ? > Not too sure on the topic, so a simple yes/no would be appreciated.
Yes. There is also a thread on dri-devel About it. Marek > > -Emil
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
