On 16/06/15 10:37, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 07:36:26PM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: >> From: "Michael H. Nguyen" <michael.h.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Move defines from intel_lrc.c to i915_reg.h so they are accessible >> to the GuC submission code; and expose a previously static function >> in the execlist code which will also be required for GuC submission. > > What would have been better would have to been to split the lrc code > from the execlists code so that the sharing is more obvious and the > overloading separate from the common code. > -Chris What would have been better is not to have put these fairly generic details about the hardware into a C file in the first place. And not to have split execlist and ringbuffer modes into two entirely different paths. And various other historical decisions. But we can only fix the code as it stands, not as it ought to have been. Anyway, this is just a bulk cut-n-paste, so I'm not inclined to do any restructuring on it during this process. But someone working on execlists could certainly tidy it up later, perhaps as part of a general drive towards deduplicating the code paths and partitioning (context vs ringbuffer vs engine) functionality in a more coherent way. .Dave. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
