On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 17:13, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org>wrote: > > > Thoughts? It may also make sense to split some of our port specific > > > files where they differ enough from previous platforms. E.g. g4x DP vs > > > ironlake+... > > > > I've just talked about this a bit with Eugeni in the context of Haswell, > > and I think we might want to hold of for that code until we move output > > stuff all over the place. > > Yeah I don't want to make HSW any harder than necessary; we can put off > splits there. > (I suspect those 2 paragraphs above are enough for a new phoronix article on HSW already :)). Yeah, I've been through the same issues as Jesse, and we were talking with Daniel about this. Our intel_display.c is huge and unnecessarily complex, and we need to split it at some point if we want to keep our mental sanity. At least the split of it into intel_display.c and intel_pch_display.c would simplify the things a lot; and maybe we could add intel_display_gen6.c, intel_display_gen7.c, intel_display_pch_cpt.c and intel_display_pch_lpt.c and move those hardware-specific stuff there for simplifying out tasks in the future. I was also thinking on adding a intel_workarounds.c for handling all the W/As we have in one place, and having some support for calling them via callbacks to run specific WAs during the modeset, after suspend/resume cycle and so on. For i915_regs.h, I don't think there is a need to split is for now. It is a nice way to have all the registers in just one place, and at least I never had a problem with it so far. -- Eugeni Dodonov <http://eugeni.dodonov.net/> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20120321/af039522/attachment.htm>
