On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:41:26PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 03/09/2015 09:55 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > >Since we use obj->active as a hint in many places throughout the code, > >knowing its state in debugfs is extremely useful. > > > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >--- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > >index 042ad2fec484..809f6eadc10c 100644 > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > >@@ -123,8 +123,9 @@ describe_obj(struct seq_file *m, struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj) > > struct i915_vma *vma; > > int pin_count = 0; > > > >- seq_printf(m, "%pK: %s%s%s %8zdKiB %02x %02x %x %x %x%s%s%s", > >+ seq_printf(m, "%pK: %s%s%s%s %8zdKiB %02x %02x %x %x %x%s%s%s", > > &obj->base, > >+ obj->active ? "*" : " ", > > %c etc would maybe be more compact code? (Hey I have to earn my > bike-shedding badge somehow! ;) Anyway, The rationale for the empty flags to use " " was to keep the fields aligned. I'm still about 60:40 whether that was a good idea in terms of formatting the debugfs files. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
