On a previous iteration of this patch, I created an Execlists
version of __i915_add_request and asbtracted it away as a
vfunc. Daniel Vetter wondered then why that was needed:
"with the clean split in command submission I expect every
function to know wether it'll submit to an lrc (everything in
intel_lrc.c) or wether it'll submit to a legacy ring (existing
code), so I don't see a need for an add_request vfunc."
The honest, hairy truth is that this patch is the glue keeping
the whole logical ring puzzle together:
- i915_add_request is used by intel_ring_idle, which in turn is
used by i915_gpu_idle, which in turn is used in several places
inside the eviction and gtt codes.
- Also, it is used by i915_gem_check_olr, which is littered all
over i915_gem.c
- ...
If I were to duplicate all the code that directly or indirectly
uses __i915_add_request, I'll end up creating a separate driver.
To show the differences between the existing legacy version and
the new Execlists one, this time I have special-cased
__i915_add_request instead of adding an add_request vfunc. I
hope this helps to untangle this Gordian knot.
Signed-off-by: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>
[danvet: Adjust to ringbuf->FIXME_lrc_ctx per the discussion with
Thomas Daniel.]
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
48e29f5535