On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 08:51:22AM +0000, Daniel, Thomas wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Daniel Vetter [mailto:daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daniel > > Vetter > > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 9:10 PM > > To: Daniel, Thomas > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 30/43] drm/i915/bdw: Two-stage execlist > > submit process > > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 05:04:38PM +0100, Thomas Daniel wrote: > > > From: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry@xxxxxxxxx> > > > +static void execlists_context_unqueue(struct intel_engine_cs *ring) { > > > + struct intel_ctx_submit_request *req0 = NULL, *req1 = NULL; > > > + struct intel_ctx_submit_request *cursor = NULL, *tmp = NULL; > > > + > > > + if (list_empty(&ring->execlist_queue)) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + /* Try to read in pairs */ > > > + list_for_each_entry_safe(cursor, tmp, &ring->execlist_queue, > > > +execlist_link) { > > > > Ok, because checkpatch I've looked at this. Imo open-coding this would be > > much easier to read i.e. > > > > if (!list_empty) > > grab&remove first item; > > if (!list_empty) > > grab&remove 2nd item; > > > > Care to follow up with a patch for that? > > > > Thanks, Daniel > This needs to be kept as a loop because if there are two consecutive > requests for the same context they are squashed. Also the non-squashed > requests are not removed here (unfortunately the remove is in the next > patch). Ok, this sounds like we need to overhaul it anyway for the request tracking then. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
