Re: [PATCH xserver 4/6] meson: Default to gnu99
Adam Jacksonwrites: > We don't really require all of C99, but enough that it's not worth > bothering with the distinction, especially if your toolchain is new > enough that meson is a thing for you. We could do strict C99 if we > really insisted on spelling it __typeof__, but who wants that? Nobody, > that's who. > > Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson Patch 1-4 are: Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
Hi, On 28 September 2017 at 03:49, Ian Romanickwrote: > On 09/27/2017 04:55 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> Sadly by the time we were aware of the dates for the khronos f2f it >> was not possible to change the dates for XDC :-( >> >> The XDC dates were set in Feb, and afaict the khronos dates were >> announced in July (?), so take this up with khronos ;-) > > Ok... so we're going to go there. > > Frankly, that's a giant steaming load of bull. That's a bit much; can you please tone it down? > Blocks of hotel rooms, > multiple conference rooms for 500+ people, and catering for the Khronos > meeting was booked in late 2016. We're already working on contracts for > the September 2018 meeting. Contracts of this scale are really hard to > change. There are 5x to 10x as many people at a Khronos face-to-face as > at XDC. Events of that scale have a massively deep pipeline. > > Google was just unwilling to find a different dates for space *at their > own campus*. That's really, really weak. This is especially > infuriating because there are numerous Googlers who attend the Khronos > meetings. Did the organizers poll any of them? The XDC organizers > clearly did not even exercise due diligence to detect a possible > conflict. If the organizers had cared to be aware of dates of > conflicting events, they would have known. For starters, yes, it obviously sucks that the two clashed. That being said ... Logistically, Khronos (and their multiple full-time paid administrative staff) can move on two axes: time and location. Location is easy, since any city of any size has a number of four-star hotels who can host that number of people in exchange for eyewatering amounts of money directly, as well as guaranteed blocks of rooms at rates many XDC attendees couldn't afford. With the hosting locked down to avoid the insane cost, we could only move XDC in time rather than space. Time-wise, it's not just Khronos F2F which, being quarterly, is pretty hard to avoid no matter when you do it. There was Plumbers and OSS NA before (with the no-go zone of school holidays before that, and European holidays in August), and afterwards Linaro Connect, Kernel Recipes, ELCE, GNOME/Qt conferences, the GStreamer conference, and Kernel Summit. That's before you even touch things like IBC. It really hurts time-wise, and choosing not to clash means going directly back-to-back (asking people to be away for 2 weeks at a time), or you put space between them and ask people to do intercontinental trips twice in three weeks. At least XDC managed to not overlap the Vulkan WSI sessions at the F2F: there were people at XDC who'd done both. I don't know why you think an event of 105 people doesn't have a deep pipeline either ... ?! Most places don't have a surfeit of 120-person meeting rooms. The ones they do have tend to book up a long time in advance, for obvious reasons. Given that we were mostly external, those rooms have to be not in sensitive buildings, and on the ground floor close to an exit. Even with that, it required two full-time dedicated security staff (another logistical dependency) to make sure the herds of external people didn't end up wandering through an otherwise badge-only building. The catering also needed to be booked, and A/V staff to assist. We had a dependency on Jen and Stephane's time as the local support: they had to be there in person, and be able to dedicate their full week to the conference. None of that is being 'unwilling', 'weak', 'not exercis[ing] due diligence', or not caring. It's organising a conference actually being really difficult: a deference you're paying Khronos (who have an objectively easier job), and not the people who organise XDC. Just it doesn't work out perfectly, doesn't mean it's due to idiocy or lack of effort. Even if you do get all your ducks perfectly in a row, sometimes Network Rail announce a few weeks after you've booked everything that they're going to close the line to Cambridge for engineering works, so it's suddenly really difficult to even get there in the first place. Ho hum. Hopefully next year it doesn't clash. But I can guarantee you that even if it doesn't, there will still be people who are unable to come, because there is just no globally-optimal solution. Cheers, Daniel ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 7:36 AM, Matt Turnerwrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> If you had known of the khr dates, and brought it up in Feb (or really >> somewhat earlier, given that XDC is roughly same time each year +/- >> few weeks), that *might* have been early enough to move things. > > That's unfair. It's part of the X.Org board's responsibilities to plan > conferences and that means being aware of potential conflicts. In > February, six of the eight members of the X.Org board worked for > companies with Khronos access (that's not including Keith who I > suspect has access as well). > > I replied to the 2017-03-02 minutes and noted the conflict, but as you > say that was too late. Unfortunately that was the first time a date > was publicly announced, so I'm not really sure what could have been > done from outside the X.Org board. I don't remember all the details anymore, but we have plumbers right before, and Linaro connect right afterwards, both conferences that also have considerable overlap with XDC (we have a lot more than x86 folks since 2-3 years now). Bunch of people decided not to do XDC this year even, because too much travelling in one row. Plus Google's limit in scheduling a room, plus Khr f2f. We'll try to do better next year, but sometimes perfect scheduling is just not an option. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Ian Romanickwrote: > On 09/27/2017 04:55 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Romanick wrote: >>> On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Hi all, First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great XDC. Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, anything really. >>> >>> Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a >>> good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. >>> I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to >>> scheduling fail. >> >> Sadly by the time we were aware of the dates for the khronos f2f it >> was not possible to change the dates for XDC :-( >> >> The XDC dates were set in Feb, and afaict the khronos dates were >> announced in July (?), so take this up with khronos ;-) > > Ok... so we're going to go there. > > Frankly, that's a giant steaming load of bull. Blocks of hotel rooms, > multiple conference rooms for 500+ people, and catering for the Khronos > meeting was booked in late 2016. We're already working on contracts for > the September 2018 meeting. Contracts of this scale are really hard to > change. There are 5x to 10x as many people at a Khronos face-to-face as > at XDC. Events of that scale have a massively deep pipeline. > > Google was just unwilling to find a different dates for space *at their > own campus*. That's really, really weak. This is especially > infuriating because there are numerous Googlers who attend the Khronos > meetings. Did the organizers poll any of them? The XDC organizers > clearly did not even exercise due diligence to detect a possible > conflict. If the organizers had cared to be aware of dates of > conflicting events, they would have known. I have no doubt there is a long lead time on organizing large conf's.. I wasn't calling that into question. The July date was based on a quick search of my khr emails. I couldn't find any earlier reference to dates, but I could have missed something. If you had known of the khr dates, and brought it up in Feb (or really somewhat earlier, given that XDC is roughly same time each year +/- few weeks), that *might* have been early enough to move things. But IIRC there wasn't much flexibility in booking such a large room from the google side either. Plus also trying to fit around LPC/etc.. Khronos isn't the only other conference to avoid. Once the XDC date is announced and people have begun booking travel, we can't really move things. Sorry, it sucks, I wasn't happy about it either, but it is what it is. As far as other conferences that XDC attendees are likely to go to, and given the turn-out (by far largest XDC in NA), I think the dates worked out reasonably well overall. BR, -R ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On 09/27/2017 04:55 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Romanickwrote: >> On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great XDC. >>> >>> Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, >>> both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so >>> good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, >>> anything really. >> >> Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a >> good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. >> I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to >> scheduling fail. > > Sadly by the time we were aware of the dates for the khronos f2f it > was not possible to change the dates for XDC :-( > > The XDC dates were set in Feb, and afaict the khronos dates were > announced in July (?), so take this up with khronos ;-) Ok... so we're going to go there. Frankly, that's a giant steaming load of bull. Blocks of hotel rooms, multiple conference rooms for 500+ people, and catering for the Khronos meeting was booked in late 2016. We're already working on contracts for the September 2018 meeting. Contracts of this scale are really hard to change. There are 5x to 10x as many people at a Khronos face-to-face as at XDC. Events of that scale have a massively deep pipeline. Google was just unwilling to find a different dates for space *at their own campus*. That's really, really weak. This is especially infuriating because there are numerous Googlers who attend the Khronos meetings. Did the organizers poll any of them? The XDC organizers clearly did not even exercise due diligence to detect a possible conflict. If the organizers had cared to be aware of dates of conflicting events, they would have known. > BR, > -R ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Romanickwrote: > On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great XDC. >> >> Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, >> both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so >> good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, >> anything really. > > Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a > good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. > I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to > scheduling fail. > Sadly by the time we were aware of the dates for the khronos f2f it was not possible to change the dates for XDC :-( The XDC dates were set in Feb, and afaict the khronos dates were announced in July (?), so take this up with khronos ;-) BR, -R ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
It was a great time! Next year I should pay more attention that this was happening so I don't sign up at the last moment causing me to miss a day, and having a fever on the last day. Looking forward to next year's! On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Ian Romanickwrote: > On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great > XDC. > > > > Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, > > both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so > > good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, > > anything really. > > Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a > good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. > I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to > scheduling fail. > > > Here's a few things we took into account from Helsinki and tried to > apply: > > - More breaks for more hallway track. > > - Try to schedule the hot topics on the first day (did we pick the > > right ones) for better hallway track. > > - More lightning talk time to give all the late/rejected submissions > > some place to give a quick showcase. > > > > Things that didn't work out perfectly this year and that we'll try to > > get better at next year: > > - Lots of people missed the submission deadline and their talks were > > rejected only because of that. We'll do better PR by sending out a > > pile of reminders. > > - Comparitively few people asked for travel assistance. No idea > > whether this was a year with more budget around, or whether this isn't > > all that well know and we need to make more PR in maybe the call for > > papers about it. > > > > But that's just the stuff we've gathered already, we'd like to hear > > more feedback. Just reply to this mail or send a mail to > > bo...@foundation.x.org if you don't want the entire world to read it. > > And if you want to send at pseudonymous feedback, drop a pastebin onto > > the #xf-bod channel on the OFTC irc server. > > > > Thanks, Daniel > ___ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-...@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev > ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On 09/27/2017 10:07 PM, Rob Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Ian Romanickwrote: >> On 09/27/2017 04:55 PM, Rob Clark wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Ian Romanick wrote: On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Hi all, > > First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great > XDC. > > Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, > both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so > good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, > anything really. Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to scheduling fail. >>> >>> Sadly by the time we were aware of the dates for the khronos f2f it >>> was not possible to change the dates for XDC :-( >>> >>> The XDC dates were set in Feb, and afaict the khronos dates were >>> announced in July (?), so take this up with khronos ;-) >> >> Ok... so we're going to go there. >> >> Frankly, that's a giant steaming load of bull. Blocks of hotel rooms, >> multiple conference rooms for 500+ people, and catering for the Khronos >> meeting was booked in late 2016. We're already working on contracts for >> the September 2018 meeting. Contracts of this scale are really hard to >> change. There are 5x to 10x as many people at a Khronos face-to-face as >> at XDC. Events of that scale have a massively deep pipeline. >> >> Google was just unwilling to find a different dates for space *at their >> own campus*. That's really, really weak. This is especially >> infuriating because there are numerous Googlers who attend the Khronos >> meetings. Did the organizers poll any of them? The XDC organizers >> clearly did not even exercise due diligence to detect a possible >> conflict. If the organizers had cared to be aware of dates of >> conflicting events, they would have known. > > I have no doubt there is a long lead time on organizing large conf's.. > I wasn't calling that into question. The July date was based on a > quick search of my khr emails. I couldn't find any earlier reference > to dates, but I could have missed something. > > If you had known of the khr dates, and brought it up in Feb (or really > somewhat earlier, given that XDC is roughly same time each year +/- > few weeks), that *might* have been early enough to move things. But > IIRC there wasn't much flexibility in booking such a large room from > the google side either. Plus also trying to fit around LPC/etc.. > Khronos isn't the only other conference to avoid. Once the XDC date > is announced and people have begun booking travel, we can't really > move things. Sorry, it sucks, I wasn't happy about it either, but it > is what it is. As far as other conferences that XDC attendees are > likely to go to, and given the turn-out (by far largest XDC in NA), I > think the dates worked out reasonably well overall. The point of my original post wasn't to start a big to-do. My point was just that future organizers should be more careful. Once school starts in September, other conferences stop. I had always assumed that was part of the reason XDC was scheduled the way that it was scheduled. There are basically two events from mid-September to early October to avoid: LPC / kernel summit and Khronos meetings. At least as far back as 2008, XDC had always been able to avoid both. Hopefully that long run will be repeated and improved. > BR, > -R ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Rob Clarkwrote: > If you had known of the khr dates, and brought it up in Feb (or really > somewhat earlier, given that XDC is roughly same time each year +/- > few weeks), that *might* have been early enough to move things. That's unfair. It's part of the X.Org board's responsibilities to plan conferences and that means being aware of potential conflicts. In February, six of the eight members of the X.Org board worked for companies with Khronos access (that's not including Keith who I suspect has access as well). I replied to the 2017-03-02 minutes and noted the conflict, but as you say that was too late. Unfortunately that was the first time a date was publicly announced, so I'm not really sure what could have been done from outside the X.Org board. ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
Re: [Mesa-dev] XDC 2017 feedback
On 09/26/2017 09:57 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Hi all, > > First again big thanks to Stéphane and Jennifer for organizing a great XDC. > > Like last year we'd like to hear feedback on how this year's XDC went, > both the good (and what you'd like to see more of) and the not so > good. Talk selection, organization, location, scheduling of talks, > anything really. Not scheduling it to conflict with another industry event would be a good start. This is the first XDC that I've missed in nearly a decade. I know I'm not the only person that missed one or the other due to scheduling fail. > Here's a few things we took into account from Helsinki and tried to apply: > - More breaks for more hallway track. > - Try to schedule the hot topics on the first day (did we pick the > right ones) for better hallway track. > - More lightning talk time to give all the late/rejected submissions > some place to give a quick showcase. > > Things that didn't work out perfectly this year and that we'll try to > get better at next year: > - Lots of people missed the submission deadline and their talks were > rejected only because of that. We'll do better PR by sending out a > pile of reminders. > - Comparitively few people asked for travel assistance. No idea > whether this was a year with more budget around, or whether this isn't > all that well know and we need to make more PR in maybe the call for > papers about it. > > But that's just the stuff we've gathered already, we'd like to hear > more feedback. Just reply to this mail or send a mail to > bo...@foundation.x.org if you don't want the entire world to read it. > And if you want to send at pseudonymous feedback, drop a pastebin onto > the #xf-bod channel on the OFTC irc server. > > Thanks, Daniel ___ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: https://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel