One restriction common to all generations is that samplers access pairs
of rows and so we need to pad the buffer to accommodate access to that
second row. Do so unconditionally along paths that may be used by the
render pipeline.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Similar to the action taken into move-to-gpu so that we forgo the
overhead of damage tracking when the initial act of creation is on the
render paths.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
By inlining the swizzling of the alpha-channel we can support BLT copies
from an alpha-less pixmap to an alpha-destination.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Strange as it may seem... But the principle of doing less work with
greater locality should help everywhere, just not as noticeable when
real work is performed.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
When the bo is already completely damaged on the CPU, all we need to do
is to sync with the CPU bo.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If we spot that the region is wholly contained within the CPU damage
initially, we can conclude that is not in the GPU damage without
reduction.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Check if the source and mask are identical pictures and just copy the
source channel to the mask in that case.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
For the common case (at least with llc bo) where we are immediately
using an uploaded image from its linear buffer, check upfront before
computing the sampled region for transfer to the GPU.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
For the common case of glyphs, the pixmap is entirely on the GPU which
can be quickly tested before performing the more complex transformations
to determine how much pixel data we need to upload.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Without xserver support for notification of when scratch pixmaps are
reused, we simply cannot attach our privates to them lest we cause
corruption with SHM pixmaps.
This is a recent regression back unto an old, old xserver issue.
Reported-by: Paul Neumann <paul104x@yahoo.de>
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44503
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
In order for the entire PutImage to be performed inplace, we need to
maintain the tendency to keep doing inplace operations. This hint is
provided by tracking whether or not the last operation used the GTT
mapping. However, that hint was not being provided by zpixmap_blt.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If the operation does not replace existing CPU damage, we are likely to
want to reuse the pixmap again on the CPU, so avoid mixing CPU/GPU
operations.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
On systems that incur painful overhead for ring switches, it is usually
better to create a large buffer and perform a sparse copy on the same
ring than create a compact buffer and use the BLT.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If we decide to defer the upload for this instance of the source pixmap,
mark it so. Then if we do use it again we will upload it to a GPU bo and
hopefully reuse those pixels.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If the pixmap is entirely within the current CPU damage, we can forgo
reducing either the GPU or CPU damage when checking whether we need to
upload dirty pixels for a source texture.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If we think that the operation is better performed on the CPU, avoid the
overhead of manipulating our privates.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
As demonstrated with oversized glyphs and a chain of catastrophy, when
attaching our private to a pixmap after creation we need to mark the
entire CPU pixmap as dirty as we never tracked exactly which bits were
dirtied.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Glyphs, even large ones, we suspect will be reused and so the deferred
upload is counterproductive. Upload them immediately and mark them as
special creatures for later debugging.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
As we explicitly create CPU bo when wanted, we no longer desire to
spontaneously create vmaps for simply uploading to the GPU bo.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
We need to be carefully to copy the boxes in a strict lifo order so as
to avoid overwritting the last boxes when reusing the array allocations.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Avoid the overhead of tracking damage on small pixmaps when using CPU
rasterisation; the extra cost of sending the whole pixmap compared to
the damage is negligble should it ever be required on the GPU.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
As rasterisation will be performed upon the CPU we need to avoid the
readbacks form uncached memory and so we should restrict ourselves to
only create further damage within the CPU pixmap.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If we did not allocate the pixel data, such as for wedged pixmaps or
scratch buffers, then we cannot perform the pointer dance nor do we want
to create the GPU buffer.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
If the pixmap was intended for scanout, then the GPU bo will be created
upon attachment to the fb.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Chris Wilson