[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 04/11] i965: perf: reuse timescale base function from query

[Lionel Landwerlin]

On 08/03/18 21:17, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
> On Thursday, March 8, 2018 7:42:49 AM PST Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
>> We already have the same function in brw_queryobj.c
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_query.c | 13 ++-----------
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_query.c b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_query.c
>> index a084b30fe7c..d0faf4a2cb2 100644
>> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_query.c
>> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_performance_query.c
>> @@ -613,15 +613,6 @@ drop_from_unaccumulated_query_list(struct brw_context *brw,
>>      reap_old_sample_buffers(brw);
>>   }
>>   
>> -static uint64_t
>> -timebase_scale(struct brw_context *brw, uint32_t u32_time_delta)
>> -{
>> -   const struct gen_device_info *devinfo = &brw->screen->devinfo;
>> -   uint64_t tmp = ((uint64_t)u32_time_delta) * 1000000000ull;
>> -
>> -   return tmp ? tmp / devinfo->timestamp_frequency : 0;
>> -}
> This function isn't quite the same...the one in brw_queryobj.c doesn't
> have the ternary.  But, the ternary is checking the /numerator/ for
> zero, which seems kinda pointless... 0 / timestamp_frequency == 0...
>
> Patches 1-6 are:
> Reviewed-by: Kenneth Graunke <kenneth at whitecape.org>
Yeah I know. I don't know why it was there...
It's pretty much equivalent.

Thanks a lot!