On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 03:03:55PM -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Matt Turner <matts...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Pohjolainen, Topi > > <topi.pohjolai...@intel.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 07:54:15PM -0700, Matt Turner wrote: > >>> --- > >>> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.cpp | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.h | 2 ++ > >>> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.cpp > >>> b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.cpp > >>> index d806b83..9cd8b9f 100644 > >>> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.cpp > >>> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/brw_cfg.cpp > >>> @@ -71,6 +71,30 @@ bblock_t::add_successor(void *mem_ctx, bblock_t > >>> *successor) > >>> children.push_tail(::link(mem_ctx, successor)); > >>> } > >>> > >>> +bool > >>> +bblock_t::is_predecessor_of(const bblock_t *block) const > >>> +{ > >>> + foreach_list_typed_safe (bblock_link, parent, link, &block->parents) { > >> > >> I read patch number three again, and noticed this small formatting change > >> there as well. I haven't seen us leaving the space before "(" anywhere > >> else. > > > > I figure I should have a space between the macro and the ( since we > > put a space there for regular for loops.
Sounds reasonable. > > > >>> + if (parent->block == this) { > >>> + return true; > >>> + } > >> > >> We have one line blocks with and without {}. I just thought I mention in > >> case you didn't mean to. > > > > Right, I'll drop the {}. > > Oh, this is inside another {} set. I'd rather include the braces when > they're nested. This also. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev