From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Use chipset-specific irq
	installers
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:01:07 +0100
Message-ID: <1309284064_35257@CP5-2952>
References: <1309258131-19869-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<20110628174857.GA3022@snipes.kumite>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from fireflyinternet.com (server109-228-6-236.live-servers.net
	[109.228.6.236])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 802F89EFFC
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:01:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20110628174857.GA3022@snipes.kumite>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:48:57 -0700, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> I'm not totally thrilled with the name. It would make more sense to me
> if you had something like:
> if (!is_irq_enabled(ring)) {
> 	DRM_ERROR(...);
> 	dev->driver->irq_preinstall(ring->dev);
> 	dev->driver->irq_postinstall(ring->dev);
> }
> 
> This allows allows for error checking at other points without changing
> state.
> 
> I'm very nitpicky when it comes to the work assert :p

*g* I was just following the idiom Jesse started with his
assert_plane_enabled() and friends. :)

You're right that expressed as a predicate function with a separate fixup
routine this would be more useful, but more so is idiomatic programming...

Feel free to supplement the code with more error checking! :)
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre