On 10/11/17 21:00, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2017-11-10 19:08:45)
@@ -3528,7 +3502,7 @@ void i915_perf_init(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
spin_lock_init(&dev_priv->perf.oa.oa_buffer.ptr_lock);
oa_sample_rate_hard_limit =
- dev_priv->perf.oa.timestamp_frequency / 2;
+ INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->cs_timestamp_frequency / 2;
32-bit builds may complain, as this is ostensibly now a 64b division.
Right?
-Chris
Well, we already store cs_timestamp_frequency in the getparam value.
The assumption is that we'll stay well below the INT_MAX.
So that should be fine.
The following didn't raise a warning on the division with
gcc7.2.0/clang3.8.1 -m32 -Wall -Wextra :
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
uint64_t plop = ~0ULL;
int ret = plop / 2;
return ret;
}
-
Lionel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
