On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 01:25:33PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 05/08/2014 12:44 PM, Damien Lespiau wrote: > >On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > >> > >>Hi Brad, > >> > >>On 04/28/2014 04:22 PM, bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>[snip] > >>>- BUG_ON(!validate_cmds_sorted(ring)); > >>>+ BUG_ON(!validate_cmds_sorted(ring, cmd_tables, cmd_table_count)); > >>> BUG_ON(!validate_regs_sorted(ring)); > >>>+ > >>>+ BUG_ON(init_hash_table(ring, cmd_tables, cmd_table_count)); > >> > >>Is a BUG_ON a bit harsh since the above fails only on ENOMEM condition? > >> > >>If the concern is not allowing any command execution if parser setup > >>has failed, it would be nicer to the system as whole to just keep > >>rejecting everything, but let the rest of the kernel live to enable > >>debug or whatever? > > > >Those number_of_cmds allocations are a bit awkward though, couldn't we > >just embed the hlist_node into the desciptor struct? > > Until Brad comes online, I think that is because command descriptors > to hash table entries are not 1-to-1. Ah, I guess the common cmds are part of several hash tables. We could at least turn the multiple allocations into one big allocation though. -- Damien _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
