Re: [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] Rename gem_concurren_all over gem_concurrent_blit

[David Weinehall <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com>]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 03:32:08PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote:
> gem_concurrent_all is misspelled in the subject.
> 
> On 23 October 2015 at 12:42, David Weinehall
> <david.weinehall@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > We'll both rename gem_concurrent_all over gem_concurrent_blit
> > and change gem_concurrent_blit in this changeset. To make
> > this easier to follow we first do the the rename.
> 
> Please add a Signed-off-by line to your patches as intel-gpu-tools
> requires contributions to follow the developer's certificate of origin
> (http://developercertificate.org/).

Oh, of course.

> > ---
> >  tests/gem_concurrent_blit.c | 1116 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 1108 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> This appears only to be adding gem_concurrent_blit, not renaming
> gem_concurrent_all. Also, the relevant changes to .gitignore are
> missing from this patch and the third patch in this series.

Only copying it over gem_concurrent_blit without removing
gem_concurrent_all simultaneously is intentional;
that way the patches can be bisected without things missing.
At least that's the theory.

I'll amend the commit message a bit to make that clearer.


Regards, David
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx