Hello,

I happen to have a Haswell 4600 so I tried to apply this patch, I am
running a snapshot from 16 Jul 2017 and just updated my src.  My
drm_linux.h looks much different than the one your patch was meant for.
cvs log shows it to be revision 1.56 so I'm not sure where the
discrepancy lies. My drm_linux.h does not contain the lines provided in
the context of the diff.

Is there a tag or branch I should be pulling from? I've followed the
instructions following current.

This is the first time I've tried to apply a patch from this mailing
list so I suspect I am doing something wrong, any pointers?

On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 03:19:41PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Can somebody test the following diff on Ivy Bridge or Haswell (Intel
> HD Graphics 2500/4000/4600/4700/5000/5100/5200)?
> 
> When I added support for the command parser, I took a bit of a
> shortcut and implemented the hash tables as a single linked list.
> This diff fixes that.
> 
> For the hash function I used a "mode (size-1)" approach that leaves
> one of the hash table entries unused.  Perhaps somebody with a CS
> background has a better idea that isn't too complicated to implement?
> 
> Paul, Stuart, there is a small chance that this will improve the
> vncviewer performance.
> 
> 
> Index: dev/pci/drm/drm_linux.h
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/pci/drm/drm_linux.h,v
> retrieving revision 1.56
> diff -u -p -r1.56 drm_linux.h
> --- dev/pci/drm/drm_linux.h   14 Jul 2017 11:18:04 -0000      1.56
> +++ dev/pci/drm/drm_linux.h   16 Jul 2017 12:54:51 -0000
> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
>  
>  #include <dev/pci/drm/linux_types.h>
>  #include <dev/pci/drm/drm_linux_atomic.h>
> +#include <dev/pci/drm/drm_linux_list.h>
>  
>  /* The Linux code doesn't meet our usual standards! */
>  #ifdef __clang__
> @@ -202,16 +203,42 @@ bitmap_weight(void *p, u_int n)
>       return sum;
>  }
>  
> -#define DECLARE_HASHTABLE(x, y) struct hlist_head x;
> +#define DECLARE_HASHTABLE(name, bits) struct hlist_head name[1 << (bits)]
>  
> -#define hash_init(x)         INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&(x))
> -#define hash_add(x, y, z)    hlist_add_head(y, &(x))
> -#define hash_del(x)          hlist_del_init(x)
> -#define hash_empty(x)                hlist_empty(&(x))
> -#define hash_for_each_possible(a, b, c, d) \
> -     hlist_for_each_entry(b, &(a), c)
> -#define hash_for_each_safe(a, b, c, d, e) (void)(b); \
> -     hlist_for_each_entry_safe(d, c, &(a), e)
> +static inline void
> +__hash_init(struct hlist_head *table, u_int size)
> +{
> +     u_int i;
> +
> +     for (i = 0; i < size; i++)
> +             INIT_HLIST_HEAD(&table[i]);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool
> +__hash_empty(struct hlist_head *table, u_int size)
> +{
> +     u_int i;
> +
> +     for (i = 0; i < size; i++) {
> +             if (!hlist_empty(&table[i]))
> +                     return false;
> +     }
> +
> +     return true;
> +}
> +
> +#define __hash(table, key)   &table[key % (nitems(table) - 1)]
> +
> +#define hash_init(table)     __hash_init(table, nitems(table))
> +#define hash_add(table, node, key) \
> +     hlist_add_head(node, __hash(table, key))
> +#define hash_del(node)               hlist_del_init(node)
> +#define hash_empty(table)    __hash_empty(table, nitems(table))
> +#define hash_for_each_possible(table, obj, member, key) \
> +     hlist_for_each_entry(obj, __hash(table, key), member)
> +#define hash_for_each_safe(table, i, tmp, obj, member)       \
> +     for (i = 0; i < nitems(table); i++)             \
> +            hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, tmp, &table[i], member)
>  
>  #define ACCESS_ONCE(x)               (x)
>  
> 

Reply via email to