On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 02:42:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 21 Nov 2018, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 01:51:19PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > >> Define GT_GEN() similarly to our GT_GEN_RANGE() and convert users of > >> IS_GEN<N> to pss the gen as parameter. This prepares for the addition > >> of display gen checks by renaming the IS_GENx() and using common code > >> for all the n gens. > >> > >> The following spatch was used to convert the users of these macros: > >> > >> @@ > >> expression e; > >> @@ > >> ( > >> - IS_GEN2(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 2) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN3(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 3) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN4(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 4) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN5(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 5) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN6(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 6) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN7(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 7) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN8(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 8) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN9(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 9) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN10(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 10) > >> | > >> - IS_GEN11(e) > >> + GT_GEN(e, 11) > >> ) > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > > I think this is a contentious patch. I am not sure I agree with the > change. Please hold off on merging until further discussion. Yeap. I just reviewed the ones that no body raised any issue yet. So it would pop up on their inbox again for a double change to complain. I didn't add reviewed on the patches we are still discussing exactly to avoid merging it without finishing the discussions. Thanks, Rodrigo. > > > Thanks, > Jani. > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
