On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 16:46, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:09:30AM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > > I was once again embarassed while explaining to either Ken or Paul > > about how we handle reusing the intel_decode.c file in two trees. > > Here's my attempt at a solution to the problem: Move the code into > > libdrm, and try to give it an API that we won't have to continually > > rev as we throw the kitchen sink into the intel_decode() function > > arguments. > > > > One of the things I'm interested in is doing a version that directly > > pokes at BOs instead of just a pointer, which would let us decode > > associated blocks as we see the various state pointers to them. > > There's also room for some interesting validation in that case. > > > > Further patches (mostly fixing up style) are in my libdrm tree on the > > intel-decode branch. I've tested it with Mesa on gen7 (I have further > > code to land to make gen7 decode more reasonable). > > I've only done a high-level cruise review of this series, but this is > awesome (and has been sitting on my todo list for way to long). > > Very-Much-Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> > Yeah, I agree with Daniel - I'll be very happy to have this in libdrm. Thanks a lot! -- Eugeni Dodonov <http://eugeni.dodonov.net/> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20111221/f146f0a1/attachment.htm>
