On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:35:43AM -0200, Paulo Zanoni wrote: > From: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zanoni@xxxxxxxxx> > > Because there's no need for it. Just use a static structure with a > bool field to tell if it's in use or not. The big advantage here is > not saving kzalloc/kfree calls, it's cutting the ugly "failed to > allocate FBC work structure" code path: in this path we call > enable_fbc() directly but we don't update fbc.crtc, fbc.fb_id and > fbc.y - they are updated in intel_fbc_work_fn(), which we're not > calling. And since testing out-of-memory cases like this is really > hard, getting rid of the code path is a major relief. No, it is not that hard to test. The complaint here should be addressed by a function to call dev_priv->display.enable_fbc, which would do the common task of setting dev_priv->fbc.crtc, .fb_id, .y and *.enabled*. That would remove duplicated code first. And then you can argue about the merits of replacing the kmalloc by growing our global state. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
