> > I'm wondering if batch->dependencies should be expressed as a set,
> > rather than a dynarray, such that testing whether a batch has a
> > given dependency is ideally O(1), not O(N).
> >
> > In practice I don't know if the asymptotic complexity matters, esp. for
> > small numbers of batches, a
On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 16:15:14 -0400
Alyssa Rosenzweig wrote:
> > + * A BO is either being written or read at any time, that's what the type
> > field
> > + * encodes.
>
> Might this be inferred from (writer != NULL) and (readers->length > 0)?
No, I need to keep the old writer around when the
> + * A BO is either being written or read at any time, that's what the type
> field
> + * encodes.
Might this be inferred from (writer != NULL) and (readers->length > 0)?
> +util_dynarray_foreach(&batch->dependencies,
> + struct panfrost_batch_fence *, dep)
The idea is to track which BO are being accessed and the type of access
to determine when a dependency exists. Thanks to that we can build a
dependency graph that will allow us to flush batches in the correct
order.
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon
---
src/gallium/drivers/panfrost/pan_context.h |
