On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 03:33:13PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 05:23:27PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2015, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 04:23:30PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > >>> Add a common function to return "yes" or "no" string based on the > > >>> argument, and drop the local versions of it. > > >> > > >> Purely out of curiosity, gcc is able to amalgamate the constant strings > > >> (I remember reading that it is intelligent enough to do so), right? i.e. > > >> size i915.ko doesn't change (at least .data, we may see .text > > >> differences for gcc having different ideas about inlines)? > > > > > > I admit to giving GCC the benefit of the doubt. I may be naïve that way, > > > trusting the tools to do what seems like the obviously right thing to > > > do. > > > > > > If GCC lets us down, we could try something like the yesno version in > > > drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_debugfs.c. GCC not doing the > > > right thing with that would be violating the standard. > > > > AFAICT GCC does the right thing with the patch. > > Fwiw, I didn't see any harm in the series, so > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Merged just this patch (due to conflict fun for now) to dinq, thanks. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
