On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 05:10:25PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote: > This renames intel_batchbuffer_reloc to brw_emit_reloc and changes the > parameter naming and ordering to match drm_intel_bo_emit_reloc(). > > For now, it's a trivial wrapper that accesses batch->bo. When we > rework relocations, it will start doing actual work. > --- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/genX_blorp_exec.c | 8 ++++---- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c | 15 +++++++-------- > src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.h | 17 +++++++---------- > 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/genX_blorp_exec.c > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/genX_blorp_exec.c > index 7a2c8aaa596..78854e6fada 100644 > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/genX_blorp_exec.c > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/genX_blorp_exec.c > @@ -55,10 +55,10 @@ blorp_emit_reloc(struct blorp_batch *batch, > struct brw_context *brw = batch->driver_batch; > > uint32_t offset = (char *)location - (char *)brw->batch.map; > - return intel_batchbuffer_reloc(&brw->batch, address.buffer, offset, > - address.read_domains, > - address.write_domain, > - address.offset + delta); > + return brw_emit_reloc(&brw->batch, offset, > + address.buffer, address.offset + delta, > + address.read_domains, > + address.write_domain); > } > > static void > diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > index c35d9ca5bda..cf69927f54c 100644 > --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_batchbuffer.c > @@ -580,16 +580,15 @@ _intel_batchbuffer_flush_fence(struct brw_context *brw, > /* This is the only way buffers get added to the validate list. > */ > uint64_t > -intel_batchbuffer_reloc(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch, > - drm_bacon_bo *buffer, uint32_t offset, > - uint32_t read_domains, uint32_t write_domain, > - uint32_t delta) > +brw_emit_reloc(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch, uint32_t batch_offset, > + drm_bacon_bo *target, uint32_t target_offset, > + uint32_t read_domains, uint32_t write_domain)
Names make sense, but target_offset limited to u32? I hope that's on your today list. (As well as stop passing around more than the single write bit, the savings are quite substantial.) Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
