On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 3:15 PM Rob Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 2:04 PM Connor Abbott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 4:43 PM Rob Clark <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > This is needed to properly interpret some of the sections. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c | 2 ++ > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c > > > index faca2a0243ab..e586577e90de 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a6xx_gpu_state.c > > > @@ -1796,6 +1796,7 @@ static void a7xx_show_shader(struct > > > a6xx_gpu_state_obj *obj, > > > > > > print_name(p, " - type: ", > > > a7xx_statetype_names[block->statetype]); > > > print_name(p, " - pipe: ", a7xx_pipe_names[block->pipeid]); > > > + drm_printf(p, " - location: %d", block->location); > > > > We should probably at least try to keep it proper YAML by indenting > > everything after another level... > > this made me realize I missed a \n... but otherwise I think the indent > is correct? Or should location not have a leading '-'?
beyond that, even without the added location field, some random online yaml checker is telling me that we were already not proper yaml.. so I guess, :shrug:? BR, -R
