On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 08:31:59AM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: > On 16/06/15 10:37, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 07:36:26PM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: > >> From: "Michael H. Nguyen" <michael.h.nguyen@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Move defines from intel_lrc.c to i915_reg.h so they are accessible > >> to the GuC submission code; and expose a previously static function > >> in the execlist code which will also be required for GuC submission. > > > > What would have been better would have to been to split the lrc code > > from the execlists code so that the sharing is more obvious and the > > overloading separate from the common code. > > -Chris > > What would have been better is not to have put these fairly generic > details about the hardware into a C file in the first place. And not to > have split execlist and ringbuffer modes into two entirely different > paths. And various other historical decisions. But we can only fix the > code as it stands, not as it ought to have been. You know I sent patches... -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
