On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 09:43:54AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 10:31:17AM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 07:46:46AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Prime numbers are interesting for testing components that use multiplies > > > and divides, such as testing struct drm_mm alignment computations. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/Kconfig | 4 + > > > drivers/gpu/drm/Makefile | 1 + > > > drivers/gpu/drm/lib/drm_prime_numbers.c | 175 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/gpu/drm/lib/drm_prime_numbers.h | 10 ++ > > > 4 files changed, 190 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/lib/drm_prime_numbers.c > > > create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/lib/drm_prime_numbers.h > > > > Hm, why not put this in lib/ ? Don't see anything DRM-specific here > > at first glance and this might be useful to others. Or others might > > come up with improvements and they'll be more likely to discover it > > outside of DRM. > > Because that is a 3+ month cycle before I can then apply the testcases, > and without the testscases do you want the bugfixes? Do patches for lib/ have to go through a different tree? Don't think so, I've seen e.g. changes to lib/ucs2_string.c go through the EFI tree. It seems to me lib/ is sort of free for all. > If I put in in drm/lib then lift it, I can use it immediately and drop > the local copy once merged. That is also workable of course. Anyway, it was just a suggestion. Thanks, Lukas _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
