[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/11] drm/i915: Refactor instdone loops on new subslice functions

[Summers, Stuart]

On Wed, 2019-08-21 at 23:56 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Stuart Summers (2019-08-21 00:05:42)
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > index a82cea95c2f2..99bee06cdbdb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_types.h
> > @@ -576,20 +576,19 @@ intel_engine_is_virtual(const struct
> > intel_engine_cs *engine)
> >         return engine->flags & I915_ENGINE_IS_VIRTUAL;
> >  }
> >  
> > -#define instdone_slice_mask(dev_priv__) \
> > -       (IS_GEN(dev_priv__, 7) ? \
> > -        1 : RUNTIME_INFO(dev_priv__)->sseu.slice_mask)
> > -
> > -#define instdone_subslice_mask(dev_priv__) \
> > -       (IS_GEN(dev_priv__, 7) ? \
> > -        1 : RUNTIME_INFO(dev_priv__)->sseu.subslice_mask[0])
> > -
> > -#define for_each_instdone_slice_subslice(dev_priv__, slice__,
> > subslice__) \
> > -       for ((slice__) = 0, (subslice__) = 0; \
> > -            (slice__) < I915_MAX_SLICES; \
> > -            (subslice__) = ((subslice__) + 1) < I915_MAX_SUBSLICES
> > ? (subslice__) + 1 : 0, \
> > -              (slice__) += ((subslice__) == 0)) \
> > -               for_each_if((BIT(slice__) &
> > instdone_slice_mask(dev_priv__)) && \
> > -                           (BIT(subslice__) &
> > instdone_subslice_mask(dev_priv__)))
> > -
> > +#define instdone_has_slice(dev_priv___, sseu___, slice___) \
> > +       ((IS_GEN(dev_priv___, 7) ? 1 : ((sseu___)->slice_mask)) & \
> > +       BIT(slice___))
> 
>        ((IS_GEN(dev_priv___, 7) ? 1 : \
>        ((sseu___)->slice_mask)) & BIT(slice___))
> 
> That split is marginally easier to read

Makes sense, and I agree what I have is a little ugly... I'll change in
the next revision.

> 
> So much for hoping the gen7 special case just disappears.
> 
> > +#define instdone_has_subslice(dev_priv__, sseu__, slice__,
> > subslice__) \
> > +       (IS_GEN(dev_priv__, 7) ? (1 & BIT(subslice__)) : \
> > +        intel_sseu_has_subslice(sseu__, 0, subslice__))
> > +
> > +#define for_each_instdone_slice_subslice(dev_priv_, sseu_, slice_,
> > subslice_) \
> > +       for ((slice_) = 0, (subslice_) = 0; (slice_) <
> > I915_MAX_SLICES; \
> > +            (subslice_) = ((subslice_) + 1) % I915_MAX_SUBSLICES,
> > \
> > +            (slice_) += ((subslice_) == 0)) \
> > +               for_each_if((instdone_has_slice(dev_priv_, sseu_,
> > slice_)) && \
> > +                           (instdone_has_subslice(dev_priv_,
> > sseu_, slice_, \
> > +                                                   subslice_)))
> 
> That was less convoluted than I was expecting from previous skims.
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>

Thanks!

-Stuart

> -Chris