On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 11:54:19AM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > We can even (or alternatively) make dpll_info part of intel_shared_dpll.
>
> You mean something like?
>
> struct intel_shared_dpll {
> ...
> - id;
> - name;
> - flags;
> + const struct dpll_info *info;
> ...
> };
yep, that.
> That would make sense to me since the info seems to be all read-only
> data. Oh and then we wouldn't even need the extra 'funcs' pointer.
> Some extra indirection there but this isn't performance sensitive or
> anything.
>
> Even if it wouldn't make things smaller I'd still like it just for
> the clarity of having all the read-only data being const.
>
> >
> > Below is the diff to make funcs a pointer on top of previous patch.
>
> This one is
> Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Humn... do you mean the initial patch or the diff below? If I'm going to
embed dpll_info inside intel_shared_dpll, this patch would be pointless.
Lucas De Marchi
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
