On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Paul Menzel
<paulepanter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Alex,
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 13.03.2013, 12:38 -0400 schrieb alexdeucher@xxxxxxxxx:
>> From: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
>>
>> Remove old comment and allow benchmarking moves within the
>> same memory domain for both dma and blit methods.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_benchmark.c | 5 +----
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_benchmark.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_benchmark.c
>> index a2f0c24..6e05a2e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_benchmark.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_benchmark.c
>> @@ -122,10 +122,7 @@ static void radeon_benchmark_move(struct radeon_device *rdev, unsigned size,
>> goto out_cleanup;
>> }
>>
>> - /* r100 doesn't have dma engine so skip the test */
>> - /* also, VRAM-to-VRAM test doesn't make much sense for DMA */
>> - /* skip it as well if domains are the same */
>> - if ((rdev->asic->copy.dma) && (sdomain != ddomain)) {
>> + if (rdev->asic->copy.dma) {
>
> why is the comment not valid anymore? What changed?
In my opinion it was never valid.
Alex
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
