From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] intel_ringbuffer.c reorg + cleanups Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:49:54 +0100 Message-ID: <1334177401_373042@CP5-2952> References: <1334175179-1514-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fireflyinternet.com (smtp.fireflyinternet.com [109.228.6.236]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6F2F9E9D6 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:50:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1334175179-1514-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Intel Graphics Development Cc: Daniel Vetter List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:12:45 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch series is inspired by Ben's ring->get|put_irq cleanup for gen6+ and > my perpetual hatred for intel_ringbuffer.c. > > It's a lot of churn, but the end result is imho worth it - I almost started to > like what the ringbuffer abstraction looks like now. There are some follow-up > cleanups possible, but I think that can wait until we've cleanup up our domain > tracking and ripped out the flushing_list (if that ever happens). > > Commments, flames and review highly welcome. It's not offensive. Cleaning up the function names and the initialisation is certainly worth it. Maybe I was just expecting more. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre