Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/guc: Clean up of register capture search

2023-02-06 Thread John Harrison
On 2/3/2023 23:29, Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote: I see you are inferring that a guc-id of zero can be valid. I am guessing that might have contributed to some lost captures? Thanks for catching this. I'm not inferring anything. I might be implying something, though. The patch description

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/guc: Clean up of register capture search

2023-02-03 Thread Teres Alexis, Alan Previn
I see you are inferring that a guc-id of zero can be valid. I am guessing that might have contributed to some lost captures? Thanks for catching this. Reviewed-by: Alan Previn On Thu, 2023-02-02 at 17:10 -0800, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: > From: John Harrison > > The comparison in the

[PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/guc: Clean up of register capture search

2023-02-02 Thread John . C . Harrison
From: John Harrison The comparison in the search for a matching register capture node was not the most readable. So remove two redundant terms and re-format to keep each term on a single line, and only one term per line. Signed-off-by: John Harrison ---