drm/i915: Remove the unsightly "optimisation" from flush_fence()

As i915_wait_request() will first check for an already passed seqno,
doing it also in the caller is a waste of space for a cold path.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index f7cd346..bac3570 100644 (file)
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -2280,11 +2280,6 @@ static int i830_write_fence_reg(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
        return 0;
 }
 
-static bool ring_passed_seqno(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, u32 seqno)
-{
-       return i915_seqno_passed(ring->get_seqno(ring), seqno);
-}
-
 static int
 i915_gem_object_flush_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
 {
@@ -2302,14 +2297,11 @@ i915_gem_object_flush_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
        }
 
        if (obj->last_fenced_seqno) {
-               if (!ring_passed_seqno(obj->ring,
-                                      obj->last_fenced_seqno)) {
-                       ret = i915_wait_request(obj->ring,
-                                               obj->last_fenced_seqno,
-                                               true);
-                       if (ret)
-                               return ret;
-               }
+               ret = i915_wait_request(obj->ring,
+                                       obj->last_fenced_seqno,
+                                       true);
+               if (ret)
+                       return ret;
 
                obj->last_fenced_seqno = 0;
        }