Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: rename i915_gem_alloc_object() to i915_gem_object_create()

On 22/04/16 19:14, Dave Gordon wrote: Because having both i915_gem_object_alloc() and i915_gem_alloc_object() (with different return conventions) is just too confusing! (i915_gem_object_alloc() is the low-level memory allocator, and remains unchanged, whereas i915_gem_alloc_object() is a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: rename i915_gem_alloc_object() to i915_gem_object_create()

On pe, 2016-04-22 at 19:14 +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: > Because having both i915_gem_object_alloc() and i915_gem_alloc_object() > (with different return conventions) is just too confusing! > > (i915_gem_object_alloc() is the low-level memory allocator, and remains > unchanged, whereas

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: rename i915_gem_alloc_object() to i915_gem_object_create()

Because having both i915_gem_object_alloc() and i915_gem_alloc_object() (with different return conventions) is just too confusing! (i915_gem_object_alloc() is the low-level memory allocator, and remains unchanged, whereas i915_gem_alloc_object() is a constructor that ALSO initialises the