On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:26:01PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 07:36:25PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: > > /* Iterate over initialised rings */ > > #define for_each_ring(ring__, dev_priv__, i__) \ > > for ((i__) = 0; (i__) < I915_NUM_RINGS; (i__)++) \ > > - if (((ring__) = &(dev_priv__)->ring[(i__)]), intel_ring_initialized((ring__))) > > + for_each_if ((((ring__) = &(dev_priv__)->ring[(i__)]), intel_ring_initialized((ring__)))) > > Idly wondering if we would be happy with > > for_each_ring(ring__, dev_priv__) > for ((ring__) = &(dev_priv__)->ring[0]; > (ring__) <= &(dev_priv__)->ring[I915_NUM_RINGS]; > (ring__)++) > for_each_if(intel_ring_initialized(ring__)) > > ? > > The downside is that we have used i__ in several places rather than > ring->id. Fwiw, 13 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-) Seems a reasonable shrinkage. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
