[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 39/40] drm/i915/execlists: Refactor out can_merge_rq()

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 19/09/2018 20:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
> In the next patch, we add another user that wants to check whether
> requests can be merge into a single HW execution, and in the future we
> want to add more conditions under which requests from the same context
> cannot be merge. In preparation, extract out can_merge_rq().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 12 ++++++++++--
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> index be7dbdd7fc2c..679ce521be16 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> @@ -478,6 +478,15 @@ static bool can_merge_ctx(const struct intel_context *prev,
>   	return true;
>   }
>   
> +static bool can_merge_rq(const struct i915_request *prev,
> +			 const struct i915_request *next)
> +{
> +	if (!can_merge_ctx(prev->hw_context, next->hw_context))
> +		return false;
> +
> +	return true;

Not just return can_merge_ctx(..) ?

Regards,

Tvrtko

> +}
> +
>   static void port_assign(struct execlist_port *port, struct i915_request *rq)
>   {
>   	GEM_BUG_ON(rq == port_request(port));
> @@ -639,8 +648,7 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
>   			 * second request, and so we never need to tell the
>   			 * hardware about the first.
>   			 */
> -			if (last &&
> -			    !can_merge_ctx(rq->hw_context, last->hw_context)) {
> +			if (last && !can_merge_rq(rq, last)) {
>   				/*
>   				 * If we are on the second port and cannot
>   				 * combine this request with the last, then we
>