Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-07-20 17:57:22)
> On Thursday, July 20, 2017 8:05:19 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Kenneth Graunke (2017-07-19 23:36:58)
> > > On Wednesday, July 19, 2017 3:09:16 AM PDT Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > #define READ_ONCE(x) (*(volatile __typeof__(x) *)&(x))
> > > > @@ -117,21 +125,12 @@ add_exec_bo(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch,
> > > > struct brw_bo *bo)
> > > > batch->exec_array_size *
> > > > sizeof(batch->exec_objects[0]));
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *validation_entry =
> > > > - &batch->exec_objects[batch->exec_count];
> > > > - validation_entry->handle = bo->gem_handle;
> > > > - if (bo == batch->bo) {
> > > > - validation_entry->relocation_count = batch->reloc_count;
> > > > - validation_entry->relocs_ptr = (uintptr_t) batch->relocs;
> > > > - } else {
> > > > - validation_entry->relocation_count = 0;
> > > > - validation_entry->relocs_ptr = 0;
> > > > - }
> > > > - validation_entry->alignment = bo->align;
> > > > - validation_entry->offset = bo->offset64;
> > > > - validation_entry->flags = bo->kflags;
> > > > - validation_entry->rsvd1 = 0;
> > > > - validation_entry->rsvd2 = 0;
> > > > + struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *exec =
> > > > + memset(&batch->exec_objects[batch->exec_count], 0,
> > > > sizeof(*exec));
> > > > + exec->handle = bo->gem_handle;
> > > > + exec->alignment = bo->align;
> > > > + exec->offset = bo->offset64;
> > > > + exec->flags = bo->kflags;
> > >
> > > I liked the name "validation_entry" given that we call this the
> > > "validation
> > > list"...exec matches the struct name better, but I think validation_entry
> > > helps distinguish the two lists...
> >
> > Hmm, how about
> >
> > - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *exec =
> > - memset(&batch->exec_objects[batch->exec_count], 0, sizeof(*exec));
> > - exec->handle = bo->gem_handle;
> > - exec->alignment = bo->align;
> > - exec->offset = bo->offset64;
> > - exec->flags = bo->kflags;
> > + batch->exec_objects[batch->exec_count] = (struct
> > drm_i915_gem_exec_object2){
> > + .handle = bo->gem_handle,
> > + .alignment = bo->align,
> > + .offset = bo->offset64,
> > + .flags = bo->kflags,
> > + };
> >
> > and skip the impossible problem of naming?
> >
> > But we still end up with a couple of
> > struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *
> > validation_entry = &batch->exec_objects[index];
> > Could I just call those exec_object?
> > -Chris
>
> I'm not objecting too strongly, call it exec or exec_object if you like.
> The initializer use is pretty nice.
>
> "validation list" is a bit of a weird name anyway...
As you've seen, I think there's some merit to a distinct name so we
don't get confused with exec_bos, I've settled for
struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &batch->validation_list[index];
as that fits into 80cols :)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
