On 13/01/2017 11:11, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:59:46AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:


On 13/01/2017 10:33, Chris Wilson wrote:
Ok, ok, this cover note only exists to continue the run on joke of my
mispellings!

Everything but
[5/7] drm/i915: Convert i915_ggtt_view to use an anonymous union
has a r-b, so this is a good time to complain if this is too much of a
hack.

If you could polish your clouded crystal ball to see if more view
types might be coming, which then might have a colliding parameters
size and foil the whole idea.

I do think it is a little bit of hack with a questionable benefit.
And I think I asked a few times if you really see a performance
difference for a few bytes smaller memcmp? Presumably it would be
some test case with a huge number of partial views which could
theoretically maybe show something?

It was the doubling code size of i915_vma_compare() that struck me as
objectionable.

Why does this series shrink i915_vma_compare? Was it getting inlined in your build? For me it doesn't.

Downside is if we need to revert it would be relatively "churny".

We just split the type into two fields, the enum and size.

Yes realized that a bit later.

Regards,

Tvrtko


_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to