On 19/09/2018 20:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the next patch, we add another user that wants to check whether
requests can be merge into a single HW execution, and in the future we
want to add more conditions under which requests from the same context
cannot be merge. In preparation, extract out can_merge_rq().
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index be7dbdd7fc2c..679ce521be16 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -478,6 +478,15 @@ static bool can_merge_ctx(const struct intel_context *prev,
return true;
}
+static bool can_merge_rq(const struct i915_request *prev,
+ const struct i915_request *next)
+{
+ if (!can_merge_ctx(prev->hw_context, next->hw_context))
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
Not just return can_merge_ctx(..) ?
Regards,
Tvrtko
+}
+
static void port_assign(struct execlist_port *port, struct i915_request *rq)
{
GEM_BUG_ON(rq == port_request(port));
@@ -639,8 +648,7 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs
*engine)
* second request, and so we never need to tell the
* hardware about the first.
*/
- if (last &&
- !can_merge_ctx(rq->hw_context, last->hw_context)) {
+ if (last && !can_merge_rq(rq, last)) {
/*
* If we are on the second port and cannot
* combine this request with the last, then we
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
