On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 11:42:55AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 12/04/2017 11:36, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > >From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >I was thinking if we could get away with simplifying the API > >a bit by getting rid of the _fw variant and only have these > >three functions with a common implementation: > > > > intel_wait_for_register > > intel_wait_for_register_atomic > > __intel_wait_for_register > > > >The fast/busy loop in all cases grabs it's own forcewake and > >is done under the uncore lock. The extra overhead for call > >sites which already have the forcewake, or do not need it is > >there, but not sure that it matters for where wait_for_register > >functions are used. > > This is probably quite bad for pcode, since AFAIR those can be quite > slow. So scratch this idea I think.. There's definitely some merit here. I'd wait until Ville presents his gt/de split since that's going to be quite a major paradigm shift for us and then re-evaluate. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
