On 1 April 2015 at 22:26, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 09:57:40PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> On 1 April 2015 at 21:34, Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On 1 April 2015 at 18:30, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:15:13PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: >> >>> Missing definition and unused since their introduction. >> >>> >> >>> Cc: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> >> NAK >> >> >> >> I use all this in tools to debug lockup. Best course of action is to >> >> exclude bof.h from being distributed. My tools static link and i just >> >> point them to libdrm git tree. >> >> >> > Did not notice any mention of such out-of-tree tools in the commit >> > that introduced these functions, so I've naively assumed that they are >> > unused. >> Scratch that - I'm blind. >> >> Upon closer look at your radeondb repo, I cannot see any static >> linking in there. Also it seems that some of the functionality is >> duplicated between the two. With the radeondb version being out of >> date :'( > > Yeah i guess i never pushed anywhere patches that did that, divergence btw > my memory and what is out there. All this symbol can just be hidden and > never exported. It would cleaner, but i still need the bof.h intact as i > tend to just cp it afaict into my local radeondb copy so that i am in > sync with libdrm code. > I can volunteer with the cleanup/integration of radeondb next to libdrm_radeon. If you update your repo (or push your work elsewhere), I could double-check, integrate and nuke the duplication. It will avoid the next person from coming over and trying to nuke things, the divergence mentioned, plus the copy/pasting of bof.[ch] every time you use the tool. How does that sound ? Cheers, Emil _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
