Quoting Andy Shevchenko (2019-03-04 09:54:46) > On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 09:41:34AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Andy Shevchenko (2019-03-04 09:29:08) > > > Switch to bitmap_zalloc() to show clearly what we are allocating. > > > Besides that it returns pointer of bitmap type instead of opaque void *. > > > > Which is confusing; since we explicitly want unsigned longs, not some > > amorphous bitmap type. > > Why? You use it as a bitmap anyway since you are telling below you are using > bit ops like set/clear_bit. I consider that bitmap sits on on top of the bitops iface and so we should be using the types as defined by bitops. The allusion of "return pointer of bitmap type" is that it may become an abstract type, ill suited for the actual use. Just concerns over inferred language. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
