Quoting Daniele Ceraolo Spurio (2018-03-08 23:46:29) > The only usage outside the intel_lrc.c file is in the ringbuffer > init, but the irq mask calculated there is then overwritten for > all engines that have a non-zero shift, so we can drop it. > > This change is not aimed at code saving but at removing from > intel_engines information that does not apply to all gens that have > the engine. When checking without the temporary WARN_ON, code size > is basically unchanged: > > add/remove: 1/0 grow/shrink: 3/4 up/down: 70/-67 (3) > Function old new delta > logical_ring_setup 315 343 +28 > irq_shifts - 28 +28 > intel_init_render_ring_buffer 258 268 +10 > reset_common_ring 704 708 +4 > intel_engine_init_cmd_parser 1064 1058 -6 > intel_engines_init_mmio 1264 1256 -8 > intel_ring_default_vfuncs 584 563 -21 > intel_engines 224 192 -32 > Total: Before=1479719, After=1479722, chg +0.00% > > Suggested-by: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry@xxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@xxxxxxxxx> With the missing static const, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I had a look at restoring the use of engine->irq_shift in the irq handlers, and while that does shrink the code abit, rearranging the code brought even more savings. So I don't see a need to keep engine->irq_shift around, and we can always bring it back but unlikely if future gen do not need it. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
