On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 14:32 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote: > If there isn't we can at least consider other > alternatives that resolve the deadlock issue but that also will help > clients synchronize and keep data coherent. If clients want coherence, they're welcome to implement their own locking. Let's make sure we separate the semantics required for GPU operation from semantics required by DRM users. -- [email protected]
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- References:
- [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: "Dave Airlie" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Eric Anholt <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Thomas Hellström <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Keith Packard <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Thomas Hellström <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: "Jerome Glisse" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Thomas Hellström <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: "Jerome Glisse" <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- From: Thomas Hellström <[email protected]>
- [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- Prev by Date: mkfs.ext2 triggerd RAM corruption
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] change global zonelist order v4 [0/2]
- Previous by thread: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- Next by thread: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] DRM TTM Memory Manager patch
- Index(es):
 |