Re: [PATCH 00/13] Gen7 batch buffer command parser

Daniel Vetter
2014-03-25T13:15:41Z

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 <jani.nikula@intel.com>

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.

Cheers, Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch