On 26/07/2019 10:33, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-07-26 10:22:08)
On 23/07/2019 19:38, Chris Wilson wrote:
I read it, relatively rushed, since pressure keeps getting applied! :/
There are some good parts and implementation looks okay, but I am not
sure we need a tree. Nodes are bigger than pointers, management code is
bigger, lookup is slower.. is it a win all things considered?
A big win imo. Consider that this interface is purely debug, the primary
interface runtime will be via gt->engines, the nodes are much smaller
than the sparse array.
I guess it depends. One rb_node is three pointers and can only be used
from a single tree. Nor does the patch replaces all sparse arrays.
I am adamant that we are not adding more sparse arrays. A 2D lookup
table since that matches the HW, but even then we may just end up with
LUT (1 extra pointer load to replace the sparse array with a compact?)
I feel it's too early for this specific patch.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
