Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-03-09 01:08:08)
> Originally we were inlining gen8_cs_irq_handler() and so expected the
> compiler to constant-fold away the irq_shift (so we had hardcoded it as
> opposed to use engine->irq_shift). However, we dropped the inline given
> the proliferation of gen8_cs_irq_handler()s. If we pull the shifting
> of the iir into the caller, we can shrink the code still further:
> 
> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/3 up/down: 0/-34 (-34)
> Function                                     old     new   delta
> gen8_cs_irq_handler                          123     118      -5
> gen8_gt_irq_handler                          261     248     -13
> gen11_irq_handler                            722     706     -16
> 
> v2: Drop gen11_cs_irq_handler now that it is a simple
> stub around gen8_cs_irq_handler (Daniele)
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
> Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <[email protected]>

Pushed, thanks for the review and prompting.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to