On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 01:31:00 +0200 Mario Kleiner mario.kleiner@tuebingen.mpg.de wrote:
On Sep 15, 2011, at 12:54 AM, Francisco Jerez wrote:
Mario Kleiner mario.kleiner@tuebingen.mpg.de writes:
On Sep 14, 2011, at 6:02 PM, Keith Packard wrote:
On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:05:29 -0500, Jesse Barnes jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org wrote:
Ah thanks Mario, I blame Keith. :p I agree we should integrate this patch as it would allow us to do more fun stuff with swapping...
That patch changes a ton of stuff; would be nice to see it split into smaller chunks that could be reviewed easily.
For reference, we're talking about this series, right?
http://www.mail-archive.com/xorg-devel@lists.x.org/msg14336.html
As far as i can see, they were already split up in chunks and reviewed by Jesse, me and Franzisco Jerez - assuming they still apply to the latest server version? At least 1/5, 4/5 and 5/5 looked simple enough and 4/5 and 5/5, the swaplimit api, seem to be independent from the rest of the series?
Note that my r-b only goes to 4/5, I had some objections to 5/5 and I'm not sure if 1/5-3/5 still make sense.
I haven't checked if the rest still makes sense. 5/5 was about why a driver who requests a dri2 swaplimit change should be called back to confirm it is ok with the swaplimit change, which you said seems totally redundant, right?
Ok, so we talk specifically about 4/5, which was reviewed by all of us, i think non-controversial, and a simple addition of a dri2 swaplimit api.
Keith, what about that one for a start?
BTW, is there any reason this is being discussed outside of the mailing list?
No. It just started as a private conversation with Jesse and "drifted" into this. cc'ing dri-devel, all that was said is in this mail.
What's the latest here? I still think we need the swap limit API...