On 07/02/2022 12:44, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Mon, 07 Feb 2022, Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/02/2022 16:37, Michael Cheng wrote:
This patch series re-work a few i915 functions to use drm_clflush_virt_range
instead of calling clflush or clflushopt directly. This will prevent errors
when building for non-x86 architectures.
v2: s/PAGE_SIZE/sizeof(value) for Re-work intel_write_status_page and added
more patches to convert additional clflush/clflushopt to use drm_clflush*.
(Michael Cheng)
v3: Drop invalidate_csb_entries and directly invoke drm_clflush_virt_ran
v4: Remove extra memory barriers
v5: s/cache_clflush_range/drm_clflush_virt_range
Is anyone interested in this story noticing my open? I will repeat:
How about we add i915_clflush_virt_range as static inline and by doing
so avoid adding function calls to code paths which are impossible on Arm
builds? Case in point relocations, probably execlists backend as well.
Downside would be effectively duplicating drm_clfush_virt_range code.
But for me, (Also considering no other driver calls it so why it is
there? Should it be deleted?), that would be okay.
Keep it simple first, optimize later if necessary?
I don't think it would ever happen unless done from the start. :/
Regards,
Tvrtko
