On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:14:54AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 14/12/15 11:36, Chris Wilson wrote: > >Elsewhere we have adopted the convention of using '_link' to denote > >elements in the list (and '_list' for the actual list_head itself), and > >that the name should indicate which list the link belongs to (and > >preferrably not just where the link is being stored). > > > >s/vma_link/obj_link/ (we iterate over obj->vma_list) > >s/mm_list/vm_link/ (we iterate over vm->[in]active_list) > > A little bit of pain for the established muscle memory but I think > good in general. Assuming you compile tested it: > > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > Btw perhaps rename the link in i915_gem_active to request_link so > that the good initiative is not questioned. :) I think I have: drm_i915_gem_request.active_list i915_gem_active.link There's still a drm_i915_gem_request.client_list to be fixed up, but I can do that when I show off a scary patch to do lock-free client tracking. I've read LWN today, my brian is mush. But at least I learnt about the term lock-free locking. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
