instpm_mode != relative_constants_mode is quite unlikely to happen, so we can test it first to use C's && short-circuiting and not test on 'ring'.
I know, probably a useless micro-optimisation in the big scheme of things, but I'm going to add another test here, so might as well do it. Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <[email protected]> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c index aafcef3..896641a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c @@ -691,8 +691,8 @@ int intel_execlists_submission(struct drm_device *dev, struct drm_file *file, if (ret) return ret; - if (ring == &dev_priv->ring[RCS] && - instp_mode != dev_priv->relative_constants_mode) { + if (instp_mode != dev_priv->relative_constants_mode && + ring == &dev_priv->ring[RCS]) { ret = intel_logical_ring_begin(ringbuf, ctx, 4); if (ret) return ret; -- 1.8.3.1 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
