On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 06:38:33PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi Daniel. > > > + > > + /** > > + * @DRIVER_HAVE_DMA: > > + * > > + * Driver supports DMA, the userspace DMA API will be supported. Only > > + * for legacy drivers. Do not use. > > + */ > > + DRIVER_HAVE_DMA = BIT(4), > > What about grouping all the "legacy, do not use" flags in the bottom. > Maybe counting backwards. > > Then one does not have "noise" in-between when trying to rad and understand the > relevant flags for a new driver. > Unless I am mistaken nothing should break because we change the bit for a certain > function, but I see you kept the current order thus the current vlaues. Good idea, will do. > > @@ -662,7 +766,7 @@ static inline bool drm_dev_is_unplugged(struct drm_device *dev) > > * @feature: feature flag > > * > > * This checks @dev for driver features, see &drm_driver.driver_features, > > - * &drm_device.driver_features, and the various DRIVER_\* flags. > > + * &drm_device.driver_features, and the various &enum drm_driver_feature flags. > > * > > * Returns true if the @feature is supported, false otherwise. > > */ > > Thanks for fixing this - I had a patch floating to do the same. > But this fix is better than what I did. Just realized I've forgotten to remove the FIXME from the commit message about this. > With or without a change in ordering you can add: > > Reviewed-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> I'll respind, thanks for reviewing. Can I motivate you to also review patch 1, with that I could merge the first 2 in this series. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
