From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jani Nikula Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Gen7 batch buffer command parser Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:21:03 +0200 Message-ID: <8761n2ifcw.fsf@intel.com> References: <1392747357-25703-1-git-send-email-bradley.d.volkin@intel.com> <87y5050w3q.fsf@intel.com> <20140325131536.GC26878@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D67796E297 for ; Tue, 25 Mar 2014 06:21:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140325131536.GC26878@phenom.ffwll.local> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Daniel Vetter Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 04:43:05PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> >> Hi Bradley - >> >> Apologies for my procrastination with the review; I don't easily recall >> as tedious a review as the command and register tables. And I sure have >> reviewed a lot of miserable stuff in the past. >> >> Most infuriatingly, I did not find a single real bug in the code! >> >> I think we'll need to automate some things going forward, for example >> listing the non-conforming length encoding with Damien's tools for cross >> checking. >> >> There are a few subtle points we need to discuss (separate mails >> internally) but all in all this series is: >> >> Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula > > Ok, pulled this one in, thanks a lot for the patches&review. I think it's > time we start to move on with the next bits, the batch copy stuff seams > like a suitable piece. There's still issues with launching the entire > thing in the end, but we can start with the copy infrastructure. > > Open issues I see still: > > - The littel issue we're discussing internally. Like I've said that one is > blocking us and needs to be resolved before we can switch to enforcing > mode. > > - Secure batch dispatch is still fubar. > > - CodingStyle says: Functions should be a) at most 3 indent levels b) at > most 3 ansi screens long (i.e. 75 lines). i915_parse_cmds violates both > metrics pretty deftly. I think a few refactoring patches to extract > helper functions and structure the flow a bit would be good. Just extracting the handlers for (desc->flags & CMD_DESC_REGISTER) and (desc->flags & CMD_DESC_BITMASK) would go a long way. BR, Jani. > > Cheers, Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center