Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Since we know that the port is empty, we do not need to extract the
> count from the old request it and copy it over to the new request, or
on 'it' too many?
> attempt to unref the NULL old request pointer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c | 7 ++-----
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
> index cbf5a96f5806..b619e591f8f1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -718,12 +718,9 @@ static void guc_submit(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> static void port_assign(struct execlist_port *port,
> struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq)
> {
> - GEM_BUG_ON(rq == port_request(port));
> + GEM_BUG_ON(port_isset(port));
>
But this holds true only if we have HAS_LOGICAL_RING_PREEMPTION?
-Mika
> - if (port_isset(port))
> - i915_gem_request_put(port_request(port));
> -
> - port_set(port, port_pack(i915_gem_request_get(rq), port_count(port)));
> + port_set(port, i915_gem_request_get(rq));
> }
>
> static void guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> --
> 2.15.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
