Am 12.08.19 um 16:53 schrieb Chris Wilson: > Quoting Koenig, Christian (2019-08-12 15:50:59) >> Am 12.08.19 um 16:43 schrieb Chris Wilson: >>> Quoting Koenig, Christian (2019-08-12 15:34:32) >>>> Am 10.08.19 um 17:34 schrieb Chris Wilson: >>>>> Move the duplicated code within dma-fence.c into the header for wider >>>>> reuse. In the process apply a small micro-optimisation to only prune the >>>>> fence->cb_list once rather than use list_del on every entry. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> >>>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/dma-buf/Makefile | 10 +- >>>>> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-trace.c | 28 +++ >>>>> drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 33 +-- >>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_breadcrumbs.c | 32 +-- >>>>> include/linux/dma-fence-impl.h | 83 +++++++ >>>>> include/linux/dma-fence-types.h | 258 ++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> include/linux/dma-fence.h | 228 +---------------- >>>> Mhm, I don't really see the value in creating more header files. >>>> >>>> Especially I'm pretty sure that the types should stay in dma-fence.h >>> iirc, when I included the trace.h from dma-fence.h or dma-fence-impl.h >>> without separating the types, amdgpu failed to compile (which is more >>> than likely to be simply due to be first drm in the list to compile). >> Ah, but why do you want to include trace.h in a header in the first place? >> >> That's usually not something I would recommend either. > The problem is that we do emit a tracepoint as part of the sequence I > want to put into the reusable chunk of code.
Ok, we are going in circles here. Why do you want to reuse the code then? Christian. > -Chris _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
