On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:04:16AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> On su, 2016-08-07 at 15:45 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > - if (i) {
> > + active_bo = NULL;
>
> Could be initialized at declaration for better readability.
No. I disagree strongly. I dislike having to go back to the beginning of
the block to check to see if was initialised before the if-chain that
otherwise sets the value.
> > /* Capture all registers which don't fit into another category. */
> > static void i915_capture_reg_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > struct drm_i915_error_state *error)
> > @@ -1436,10 +1402,12 @@ void i915_capture_error_state(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> >
> > i915_capture_gen_state(dev_priv, error);
> > i915_capture_reg_state(dev_priv, error);
> > - i915_gem_capture_buffers(dev_priv, error);
> > i915_gem_record_fences(dev_priv, error);
> > i915_gem_record_rings(dev_priv, error);
> >
> > + i915_capture_active_buffers(dev_priv, error);
> > + i915_capture_pinned_buffers(dev_priv, error);
> > +
>
> Any specific reason for reordering here?
Different varieties of state capture, trying to use whitespace for
grouping.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
