> Will drop the indirect calls, and move the code to perfcnt.c (unless > you want to keep it in panfrost_drm.c).
I'm not sure. Tomeu introduced the indirection/abstraction/etc to begin with; you might want to know his thoughts. I don't know if he has plans for continued refactors. Personally, it doesn't make much difference to me, but it might be nicer to clean this up in a separate series (it's logically unrelated to performance counters). Up to you two how best to handle this, of course :) > We need to at least flush all jobs that have the perfmon pointed by > this query attached to them. Cool, just making sure. > It returns the number of perf counter groups. I could declare 4 groups > (one per block), but I'm not convinced it's really useful here. The > main interest of counter groups is when you have a large amount > of counters inside a counter block but only a limited number of counters > can be enabled simultaneously. Declaring groups in that case helps the > user take a decision about which one he wants to enable, or force him > to replay several times the same operation each time with different > counters enabled (that's what apitrace does IIRC). Sure, alright. Just thought I'd ask. :) _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
