Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-11-02 10:38:30)
>> Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-10-31 15:27:33)
>> >> +static inline struct execlist_port *
>> >> +execlists_port_next(struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists,
>> >> + const struct execlist_port * const port)
>> >> +{
>> >> + const unsigned int n = __port_add(port_index(port, execlists),
>> >> + 1,
>> >> + execlists->port_mask);
>> >
>> > How does this compare to
>> >
>> > if (port++ == execlists->port + execlists->port_mask)
>> > port = execlists->port;
>> >
>> > return port;
>> > ?
>>
>> add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 1/1 up/down: 29/-29 (0)
>> function old new delta
>> i915_guc_irq_handler 2584 2613 +29
>> intel_lrc_irq_handler 2963 2934 -29
>> Total: Before=1123627, After=1123627, chg +0.00%
>
> Hmm, your functions saw little difference and are twice as big as
> mine... Weird.
>
> I used gcc version 6.3.0 20170516 (Debian 6.3.0-18) with defconfig.
> Yourself?
I had debugs on, sigh...
Now with the defconfig and gcc (Ubuntu 6.3.0-12ubuntu2) 6.3.0 20170406:
add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-139 (-139)
function old new delta
i915_guc_irq_handler 1620 1617 -3
intel_lrc_irq_handler 1926 1790 -136
So we have a clear winner.
-Mika
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
