On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:10:28 -0700 Eric Anholt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:55:35 -0700, Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> > wrote: > > While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow > > and hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might > > as well use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares. > > > > I don't expect this code to make semaphores better or worse, but you > > never know... > > This code is generally more legible, and I think I could review it > compared to the specs in a few minutes instead of the awful I > experience I had reviewing what was there before (particularly the > awful % tricks). Still, some review inline: Keith, worth cleaning this one up? _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
