On 09:28 PM - May 18 2016, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > Otherwise we can end up in a situation where that bin just grows and > grows. > > Signed-off-by: Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> > --- > src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_tex.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_tex.c > b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_tex.c > index cc5ea5e..2523c20 100644 > --- a/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_tex.c > +++ b/src/gallium/drivers/nouveau/nvc0/nvc0_tex.c > @@ -963,6 +963,11 @@ nvc0_validate_suf(struct nvc0_context *nvc0, int s) > struct nouveau_pushbuf *push = nvc0->base.pushbuf; > struct nvc0_screen *screen = nvc0->screen; > > + if (s == 5)
This is not specific to this patch, but after seeing various patches with a
special case for `s == 5`, wouldn’t it make sense to have a define for that
index, both to make it a bit clearer to the reader why it is handled
differently, and to avoid typos? Same with having a define for the number of
surfaces (both 3D and CP) and another one for the number of 3D surfaces (or any
other method to avoid looping too many or too few times due to a typo)?
> + nouveau_bufctx_reset(nvc0->bufctx_cp, NVC0_BIND_CP_SUF);
> + else
> + nouveau_bufctx_reset(nvc0->bufctx_3d, NVC0_BIND_3D_SUF);
> +
> for (int i = 0; i < NVC0_MAX_IMAGES; ++i) {
> struct pipe_image_view *view = &nvc0->images[s][i];
> int width, height, depth;
> --
> 2.7.3
>
> _______________________________________________
> mesa-dev mailing list
> mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
