On pe, 2016-07-29 at 09:10 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 09:04:48AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 10:40:09AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > >
> > > _is_active() does not really fit to be assigned to _mask. maybe have
> > > object_active_mask() and then
> > >
> > > _is_idle/inactive/whatever() { return !object_active_mask() }
> > >
> > > Because the negation is used lot more.
> > 10 i915_gem_object_is_active(), 1 !i915_gem_object_is_active(). Of which
> > 4 use the mask and the rest as a boolean.
> Plus another 5 using the READ_ONCE() variant who only look at the active
> mask.
Being used more does not make it less ugly, quite the contrary...
_is_() returns boolean, _get_() might be mask if you insist
Regards, Joonas
> -Chris
>
--
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
