radeon tiling again...

[Roland Scheidegger]

Michel Dänzer wrote:
>> http://homepage.hispeed.ch/rscheidegger/dri_experimental/radeon_tiling_drm9.diff
>> http://homepage.hispeed.ch/rscheidegger/dri_experimental/radeon_tiling_ddx9.diff
>> http://homepage.hispeed.ch/rscheidegger/dri_experimental/radeon_tiling_dri9.diff
>> 
>> This one now uses the new surface ioctl from Stephane (included in
>>  the tiling drm patch for both core and old drm).
> 
> 
> I think we concluded on IRC that radeon_surfaces_release() should 
> also be called from radeon_do_release() in case the X server doesn't
>  clean up its surfaces?
Hmm, I think I've missed part of that discussion. Or maybe didn't pick
up the conclusion... Will do that.

> Also, I only now noticed this comment in the DDX diff:
Well, the comment is new in this patch (and so is the code for depth
moves, the older patches just have a "remember for later" comment, 
forgot to mention)

> /* The Radeon has depth tiling on all the time. Rely on surface regs
>  to + * translate the addresses (will fail if allowColorTiling is 0).
>  */
> 
> So depth moves will be broken when tiling is disabled? Not that 
> they're important...
The old code ONLY ever worked for original radeons (r100, possibly
rv200) - it could never have worked for rv100, r200, rv250, igps.
Additionally, the old code actually had an error which not only made it
(reasonable guess) 33% slower, but never copy the stencil buffer. Yet
nobody (afaik) ever complained about that. I just figured it's not worth
the hassle of doing lots of "if this card, this feature do that" code
which is never used anyway, and only supporting it if tiling is enabled
made the code much simpler.
You're right though it might not be a very good idea to support depth
moves corretly only sometimes. Guess it would in fact be better to not
support them at all, Keith seemed to be perfectly happy with that
solution. Will remove them.

> Otherwise, it looks good to go to me, good work guys! I hope my 
> comments haven't been only nitpicking.
I certainly appreciate any feedback which potentially saves me from 
major headaches later... And if I didn't want any feedback, I'd probably 
wouldn't have posted it to the list(s) multiple times ;-). So thanks for 
looking at it and pointing out the issues.

Roland