Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-06-01 11:05:18) > Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > As we store the intel_context on the request (rq->hw_context), we can > > simply compare that against the local intel_context for the > > i915->kernel_context rather than using the rq->gem_context. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c > > index 81f086397d10..94e4db1870aa 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_context.c > > @@ -610,7 +610,7 @@ static bool engine_has_kernel_context_barrier(struct intel_engine_cs *engine) > > > > any_active = true; > > > > - if (rq->gem_context == i915->kernel_context) > > + if (rq->hw_context == ce) > > We lose a little bit of readability due to that 'ce'. > But the function is compact enough so that it shows it's > nature in one eyeful. Tho you could introduce 'kec' :) kce; almost but ce is being used everywhere else so I hope the familiarity will make it easier. Not that ce is a great shorthand for intel_context; so if you have a good idea for that, as I plan to make them more prevalent that would be useful. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
