On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:10:13AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > These are static routing, but called fairly often. (Often enough that > you care to only read the register once.) Any reason not to preserve > these routing tables in dev_priv or, slightly more preferrable, intel_dp?
Looking over this a bit, I realise that Broxton suffers from the same problem, *but* uses a different struct. I think it'd be best to leave things the way they are for the time being and try to come up with a good solution that would work for both platforms without introducing separate struct pointers to dev_priv (intel_dp while logically the better option, is trickier to use from intel_ddi, since the function that would set this up doesn't use intel_dp currently). Opinions? Kind regards, David _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
