On 23 June 2017 03:21:11 BST, "Michel Dänzer" <michel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 22/06/17 11:45 PM, Eric Engestrom wrote:> > > On Thursday, 2017-06-22 10:42:21 +0900, Michel Dänzer wrote:> > >>> > >> Also, there are downsides to exposing library API calls as inline> > >> functions: E.g. if drmIoctl(2) ever needs a change (worst case a> > >> security bug fix), every user has to be recompiled to get the fix. > It's> > >> kind of like static linking through the back door. Is it really > worth it> > >> for drmIoctl(2)? Are they ever an actual bottleneck?> > > > > > The start of the conversation [1] was that the profiler was > spending> > > more time going through drmIoctl() than the actual syscall,> > > > Is that an actual problem, as opposed to a cosmetic issue? I.e. is > there> > any scenario where a metric is bounded by drmIoctl, and would > otherwise> > only be bounded by the actual syscall?> I think this is a question for Chris (cc'ed) _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
