On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:47:30PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:50:33PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote: > > > +static const struct ddi_buf_trans *skl_get_buf_trans_dp(struct drm_device *dev, > > > > struct drm_i915_private not struct drm_device! > > The device uses both dev and dev_priv; only passing in > drm_i915_private wouldn't provide access to dev, > or am I missing something? Hmm, Oh, you didn't set bits in intel_info for ult/ulx. Instead you have large if chains hidden in macros. So another task is to translate IS_*_UL? over to using a field in intel_info to reduce the code size (at the expense of more intel_info data). #define IS_SKL_ULT(P) (IS_SKL(P) && INTEL_INFO(P)->is_ult) #define IS_SKL_ULX(P) (IS_SKL(P) && INTEL_INFO(P)->is_ulx) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
