On 13/02/2015 12:20, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:48:57AM +0000, John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
Now that everything above has been converted to use requests, intel_ring_begin()
can be updated to take a request instead of a ring. This also means that it no
longer needs to lazily allocate a request if no-one happens to have done it
earlier.
Hmm, you missed out on returning @ring@ from intel_ring_begin() to make it
explicit that accessing @ring@ through any other means is verboten.
-Chris
Not sure what you mean here. The ring is used and necessary (at the
moment) in quite a lot of places. The ringbuf object could maybe be
returned by intel_ring_begin(). Although there places like
_add_request() and _retire_requests() do access the ringbuf to do tail
tracking. So some alternative access method or tracking scheme would be
required for those uses.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
