On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hmm, after some thought I am in favour of the function as a readibility >> improvement. However, I would prefer to have the iir check inlined >> into the caller. > > I had it like that originally, but I moved it into the function when I > realized all the callers have the exact same check, and it looked a bit > out of place next to the other "sub" irq handlers which do the IIR > checks themselves. > > But I'm not really attached to the idea, so I can change it back if > that's the consensus. In our shared interrupt handling code we have both cases, where either the helper function itself of the caller checks for the bits. Or sometimes both even. I'm ok with whatever approach makes sense most. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
