On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 05:55:31PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:55:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:01:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > +void i915_gem_update_fb_bits(struct drm_i915_gem_object *old,
> > > +                      struct drm_i915_gem_object *new,
> > > +                      unsigned frontbuffer_bits);
> > > +
> > 
> > Time to be a nuisance:
> > 
> > i915_gem_object_track_fb()
> > 
> > The key part is that is operates on the object. The other is just to try
> > and shorten the name as compensation.
> 
> Hm, I've thought the i915_gem part is a giveaway - I'm not too fond of the
> i915_gem_obj prefix since it's so long ...

Until we make the wholehearted change, stick to convention.

i915_bo_* coccinelle script?
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to