Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-04 11:40:53) > From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > No functional or code size change - just notice we can compact the source > by re-using a single helper for adding workarounds. > > Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c | 32 +++++------------------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c > index ffc96c8b849b..a8161324108d 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c > @@ -142,7 +142,8 @@ static void _wa_add(struct i915_wa_list *wal, const struct i915_wa *wa) > } > > static void > -__wa_add(struct i915_wa_list *wal, i915_reg_t reg, u32 mask, u32 val) > +wa_write_masked_or(struct i915_wa_list *wal, i915_reg_t reg, u32 mask, > + u32 val) This looked odd, since I was thinking that __wa_add() remained the better name for adding the actual i915_wa_list, but __wa_add() is just perplexingly the wrapper for _wa_add() For both, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
