On ke, 2016-07-27 at 12:14 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Move the single line to the callsite as the name is now misleading, and
> the purpose is solely to add the request to the execution queue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 9 +--------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index 0593ea3ba211..63984c4d8e5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -1211,13 +1211,6 @@ i915_gem_execbuffer_move_to_active(struct list_head *vmas,
> }
> }
>
> -static void
> -i915_gem_execbuffer_retire_commands(struct i915_execbuffer_params *params)
> -{
> - /* Add a breadcrumb for the completion of the batch buffer */
> - __i915_add_request(params->request, params->batch_obj, true);
> -}
> -
> static int
> i915_reset_gen7_sol_offsets(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req)
> {
> @@ -1692,7 +1685,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>
> ret = execbuf_submit(params, args, &eb->vmas);
> err_request:
> - i915_gem_execbuffer_retire_commands(params);
> + __i915_add_request(params->request, params->batch_obj, ret == 0);
This adds a new behavior of no flushing if execbuf fails to submit, I
guess it is intentional? Do mention in the commit message.
Regards, Joonas
>
> err_batch_unpin:
> /*
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
