Quoting Joonas Lahtinen (2018-02-09 07:48:21) > Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-02-09 01:11:34) > > We want to de-emphasize the link between the request (dependency, > > execution and fence tracking) from GEM and so rename the struct from > > drm_i915_gem_request to i915_request. That is we may implement the GEM > > user interface on top of requests, but they are an abstraction for > > tracking execution rather than an implementation detail of GEM. (Since > > they are not tied to HW, we keep the i915 prefix as opposed to intel.) > > There are also some req -> rq renames in addition to function renames. > > If we're touching this much code, would it make sense to at least > consolidate the parameter names into "request" or "req" when touched > here. Never req. I always used rq in the pre-existing code as shorthand, and request otherwise. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
