On 12/11/2018 17:25, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-11-12 17:12:39)
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Now that we are down to one caller, which does not even modify copied
device info, we can remove the mkwrite_device_info helper and convert the
device info pointer itself to be a pointer to static table instead of a
copy.
The copy was deliberate to avoid the extra pointer. How does the change
in code size now compare?
AFAIR grows a bit, but overall series still ends up overall smaller. I
need to re-run the numbers for more concrete info.
However, if we keep having a copy, ie. do not make device info properly
read-only, are we still interested in splitting the two? Benefit would
be diminished, but presumably people still think it would be worth it?
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
