On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 05:05:18PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 04:58:21PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 02:36:37PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: > > > If we make sure that all the dev_priv->info usages are wrapped by > > > INTEL_INFO(), we can easily modify the ->info field to be structure and > > > not a pointer while keeping the const protection in the INTEL_INFO() > > > macro. > > > > Yuck. > > Would Jani's suggestion to transmogrify INTEL_INFO() into a function > make you happier? Or is it the back and forth from *dev_priv to *dev > to dev_priv->info that is of utmost disgust? Ultimately, I'd like to see the pointer dance die. But in the meantime, I'd like to see the macro die, dev_priv->info is far less scary than INTEL_INFO(dev_priv->dev)->info, even to_i915(dev)->info is more pleasant to read. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
