From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: s/seqno/request/ tracking inside
	objects
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 12:41:26 +0200
Message-ID: <20140729104126.GP4747@phenom.ffwll.local>
References: <1406291220-14151-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
 <20140728134412.6d3b5a10@jbarnes-t420>
 <20140729072953.GB21570@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-we0-f169.google.com (mail-we0-f169.google.com
 [74.125.82.169])
 by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBA2C89CB2
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 03:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f169.google.com with SMTP id u56so8675417wes.28
 for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 03:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140729072953.GB21570@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>, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@intel.com>, Brad Volkin <bradley.d.volkin@intel.com>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:29:53AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 01:44:12PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > @@ -3038,44 +3203,35 @@ out:
> > >   */
> > >  int
> > >  i915_gem_object_sync(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> > > -		     struct intel_engine_cs *to)
> > > +		     struct intel_engine_cs *to,
> > > +		     bool readonly)
> > >  {
> > 
> > It might be nice to have sync_read/sync_write functions instead, since
> > looking up bool args or unnamed enums is a pain.
> 
> Not convinced since it is used in a single location and two function
> calls would look unelegant - but we could switch to PROT_READ |
> PROT_WRITE throughout.

Switching to PROT_READ/WRITE might be nice as a general cleanup (or some
other named thing) since read_only/write booleans are all over the place.
So I like this, but definitely something for a separate patch.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch