Re: [PATCH 1/2] intel: Add the ability to supply annotations for .aub files.

[Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1568 bytes --]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 06:43:54 -0700, Paul Berry <stereotype441@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 May 2012 20:07, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon,  7 May 2012 14:31:51 -0700, Paul Berry <stereotype441@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > This patch adds a new function,
> > > drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_set_aub_annotations(), which can be used to
> > > annotate the type and subtype of data stored in various sections of
> > > each buffer.  This data is used to populate type and subtype fields
> > > when generating the .aub file, which improves the ability of later
> > > debugging tools to analyze the contents of the .aub file.
> > >
> > > If drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_set_aub_annotations() is not called, then we
> > > fall back to the old set of annotations (annotate the portion of the
> > > batchbuffer that is executed as AUB_TRACE_TYPE_BATCH, and everything
> > > else as AUB_TRACE_TYPE_NOTYPE).
> >
> > This looks better than the interface I was thinking of.  Only real
> > nitpick note is that the style in this file is tab indents, rather than
> > 8 spaces, same as linux kernel and 2d driver style.  (I have since been
> > convinced that 8 spaces is superior, but a mix is worse).
> >
> 
> Ok.  Are there any plans to switch drm over to spaces or are we stuck with
> tabs forever?

Our project as a whole includes work on the linux kernel, and most
people working on libdrm are also working on the kernel.  As far as I'm
concerned, having a different style between them would be worse than the
minor benefit of having diffs look nicer.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 159 bytes --]

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