Quoting Daniele Ceraolo Spurio (2018-04-03 22:52:35)
> 
> 
> On 03/04/18 11:35, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Let's avoid having to delve down the pointer chain to see if the i915
> > device has support for preemption and store that on the engine, which
> > made the decision in the first place!
> > 
> > v2: Refactor common preemption policy between execlists/guc.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Tomasz Lis <tomasz....@intel.com>
> > Cc: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiar...@intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > +static inline bool
> > +__execlists_need_preempt(int prio, int last)
> 
> Nitpick: this fits on a single line

Fixed up and pushed, thanks. The refactor saves me doing in a later
patch for the third user :)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to