From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Introduce accurate frontbuffer
 tracking
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 18:05:02 +0200
Message-ID: <20140618160502.GO5821@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1403092757-31421-12-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <1403096485-26669-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <20140618145544.GQ31023@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
 <20140618155531.GK5821@phenom.ffwll.local>
 <20140618155854.GS31023@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (mail-wi0-f171.google.com
 [209.85.212.171])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1519C6E404
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:05:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f171.google.com with SMTP id n15so7925367wiw.10
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:05:09 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140618155854.GS31023@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
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>
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Sender: "Intel-gfx" <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:58:54PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:55:31PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:55:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > > +void i915_gem_update_fb_bits(struct drm_i915_gem_object *old,
> > > > +			     struct drm_i915_gem_object *new,
> > > > +			     unsigned frontbuffer_bits);
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > Time to be a nuisance:
> > > 
> > > i915_gem_object_track_fb()
> > > 
> > > The key part is that is operates on the object. The other is just to try
> > > and shorten the name as compensation.
> > 
> > Hm, I've thought the i915_gem part is a giveaway - I'm not too fond of the
> > i915_gem_obj prefix since it's so long ...
> 
> Until we make the wholehearted change, stick to convention.

Well object or objects? It operates on both after all since often we need
both so separate set/clear seemed too noisy.

> i915_bo_* coccinelle script?

cocci can't really do that, sed seems better for that.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch