Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC] Prefer INTEL_INFO(dev_priv) to INTEL_INFO(dev)

On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, Dave Gordon wrote: > For this reason, I'd like to recommend that anyone doing this sort of > bulk transformation with Cocci or awk or just sed should /always/ > include the transformation script to help those with patches in flight. I think that's

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC] Prefer INTEL_INFO(dev_priv) to INTEL_INFO(dev)

On 08/04/16 07:09, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: On to, 2016-04-07 at 18:57 +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: Where we have a suitable dev_priv pointer, we can use that rather than 'dev' for accessing INTEL_INFO(). This removes one level of memory reference, decreasing code size a little and possibly making

Re: [Intel-gfx] [RFC] Prefer INTEL_INFO(dev_priv) to INTEL_INFO(dev)

On to, 2016-04-07 at 18:57 +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: > Where we have a suitable dev_priv pointer, we can use that rather than > 'dev' for accessing INTEL_INFO().  This removes one level of memory > reference, decreasing code size a little and possibly making everything > a little faster. We could

[Intel-gfx] [RFC] Prefer INTEL_INFO(dev_priv) to INTEL_INFO(dev)

Where we have a suitable dev_priv pointer, we can use that rather than 'dev' for accessing INTEL_INFO(). This removes one level of memory reference, decreasing code size a little and possibly making everything a little faster. We could also do this for all the macros that implicitly use