On 29/03/17 09:55 PM, Christian König wrote:
> From: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
>
> No need to implement the same logic twice. Also check if the busy placements
> are identical to the already scanned placements before checking them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx>
[...]
> @@ -1077,6 +1065,23 @@ bool ttm_bo_mem_compat(struct ttm_placement *placement,
> (*new_flags & mem->placement & TTM_PL_MASK_MEM))
> return true;
> }
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> +bool ttm_bo_mem_compat(struct ttm_placement *placement,
> + struct ttm_mem_reg *mem,
> + uint32_t *new_flags)
> +{
> + if (ttm_bo_places_compat(placement->placement, placement->num_placement,
> + mem, new_flags))
> + return true;
> +
> + if ((placement->busy_placement != placement->placement ||
> + placement->num_busy_placement != placement->num_placement) &&
placement->num_busy_placement > placement->num_placement) &&
?
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
