On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:55:31PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:55:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > +void i915_gem_update_fb_bits(struct drm_i915_gem_object *old, > > > + struct drm_i915_gem_object *new, > > > + unsigned frontbuffer_bits); > > > + > > > > Time to be a nuisance: > > > > i915_gem_object_track_fb() > > > > The key part is that is operates on the object. The other is just to try > > and shorten the name as compensation. > > Hm, I've thought the i915_gem part is a giveaway - I'm not too fond of the > i915_gem_obj prefix since it's so long ... Until we make the wholehearted change, stick to convention. i915_bo_* coccinelle script? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
