On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 01:58:12PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > I have a bit mixed feelings with this patch as I have tripped > > > around here myself recently. > > > > > > I think we should just drop this patch and use: > > > ret = intel_ring_begin(ring, 3 * <amount>) on the subsequent > > > patches that modify the amount. > > > > > > This way the intel_ring_begin will always be the one that > > > shows in a diff. And raises alarm if it doesnt. We don't want > > > this to be too transparent and looking too easy for the next reader. > > > As the reviewer is the only and last line of defense ensuring > > > symmetry between intel_ring_begin and amount of emits. > > > > Considering intel_ring_emit_wa() adds all the needed information to > > dev_priv->intel_wa_regs and dev_priv->num_wa_regs anyway, we could > > trivially split this into constructing dev_priv->intel_wa_regs first, > > And only *once*. Note that Arun is signed up to fix all of that, starting with proposing changes upfront. -- Damien _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
