From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Widawsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/16] drm/i915: cleanup i915_add_request Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:36:32 -0700 Message-ID: <20130420183631.GA1546@bwidawsk.net> References: <1365089568-20457-1-git-send-email-mika.kuoppala@intel.com> <1365089568-20457-3-git-send-email-mika.kuoppala@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from shiva.localdomain (unknown [209.20.75.48]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB47AE6122 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:34:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1365089568-20457-3-git-send-email-mika.kuoppala@intel.com> 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: Mika Kuoppala Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 06:32:34PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > Only execbuffer needs all the parameters. Cleanup everything > else behind macro. > > v2: _i915_add_request as function name (Chris Wilson) > Wouldn't the convention be __i915_add_request? > Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala In terms of cleanups however, I would like to put the return parameter (seqno) last. A later patch in the series makes that even more desirable IMO. I wouldn't bother with this patch, personally. Anyway, because I can't find anything functionally incorrect, an unenthusiastic: Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky If you fix up the argument list ordering, a somewhat enthusiastic: Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky [snip] -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center