On 2010.09.02 16:56:19 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > If I'm not completely mistaken, all these ringbuffer register have the > same offsets over a common base: 0x02000 for the render ring, 0x04000 for > bsd on gen5, 0x12000 for bsd on gen6.
yes, 0x22000 for blitter on gen6. > > Can't we just store that base somewhere in intel_ring_buffer and kill all > these copy&pasted register access macros? I've played around a bit with > this, and most functions become so small it's cheaper to convert them to > inlines. This also has the potential make the other functions simpler, > perhaps even making them fully generic. Oh, and adding new ringbuffers > should becoma way easier, too (blitter ring anyone?). > > At least my local hacks here where good enough to watch the lotr. If you > want I'll push them somewhere, but the patches are not really great and > definitely conflict against newer stuff. > please put it somewhere, I'd like to take a look, I feel uncomfortable to add blitter ring in current structure... -- Open Source Technology Center, Intel ltd. $gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.pgp.net --recv-keys 4D781827
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
