[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/15] drm/i915: drop i915_add_request right in front of i915_wait_request

[Daniel Vetter]

... take advantage of the new implicit request issuing of
i915_wait_request.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c |   12 +++---------
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 3bdd759..4eeed4e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -2122,7 +2122,6 @@ i915_gpu_idle(struct drm_device *dev)
 {
 	drm_i915_private_t *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
 	bool lists_empty;
-	uint32_t seqno;
 
 	spin_lock(&dev_priv->mm.active_list_lock);
 	lists_empty = list_empty(&dev_priv->mm.flushing_list) &&
@@ -2134,11 +2133,8 @@ i915_gpu_idle(struct drm_device *dev)
 
 	/* Flush everything onto the inactive list. */
 	i915_gem_flush(dev, I915_GEM_GPU_DOMAINS, I915_GEM_GPU_DOMAINS);
-	seqno = i915_add_request(dev, NULL);
-	if (seqno == 0)
-		return -ENOMEM;
 
-	return i915_wait_request(dev, seqno);
+	return i915_wait_request(dev, i915_gem_next_request_seqno(dev));
 }
 
 static int
@@ -2242,14 +2238,12 @@ i915_gem_evict_something(struct drm_device *dev, int min_size)
 			}
 
 			if (obj != NULL) {
-				uint32_t seqno;
+				uint32_t seqno =
+					i915_gem_next_request_seqno(dev);
 
 				i915_gem_flush(dev,
 					       obj->write_domain,
 					       obj->write_domain);
-				seqno = i915_add_request(dev, NULL);
-				if (seqno == 0)
-					return -ENOMEM;
 
 				ret = i915_wait_request(dev, seqno);
 				if (ret)
-- 
1.6.6.1