On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:07:54PM -0800, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
>> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 05:17:29 PM Matt Turner wrote:
>> > It's called by the inline intel_batchbuffer_begin() function which
>> > itself is used in BEGIN_BATCH. So in
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:07:54PM -0800, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 05:17:29 PM Matt Turner wrote:
> > It's called by the inline intel_batchbuffer_begin() function which
> > itself is used in BEGIN_BATCH. So in sequence of code emitting multiple
> > packets, we have inl
On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 05:17:29 PM Matt Turner wrote:
> It's called by the inline intel_batchbuffer_begin() function which
> itself is used in BEGIN_BATCH. So in sequence of code emitting multiple
> packets, we have inlined this ~200 byte function multiple times. Making
> it an out-of-line f
On 11/25/2015 03:17 AM, Matt Turner wrote:
> It's called by the inline intel_batchbuffer_begin() function which
> itself is used in BEGIN_BATCH. So in sequence of code emitting multiple
> packets, we have inlined this ~200 byte function multiple times. Making
> it an out-of-line function presumab
It's called by the inline intel_batchbuffer_begin() function which
itself is used in BEGIN_BATCH. So in sequence of code emitting multiple
packets, we have inlined this ~200 byte function multiple times. Making
it an out-of-line function presumably improved icache usage.
Improves performance of Gl
