Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/51] drm/i915: Rename 'flags' to 'dispatch_flags' for better code reading

2015-02-27 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:14:06PM +, John Harrison wrote: > On 25/02/2015 21:34, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:48:10AM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: > >>From: John Harrison > >> > >>There is a flags word that is passed through the execbuffer code path all > >>t

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/51] drm/i915: Rename 'flags' to 'dispatch_flags' for better code reading

2015-02-27 Thread John Harrison
On 25/02/2015 21:34, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:48:10AM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: From: John Harrison There is a flags word that is passed through the execbuffer code path all the way from initial decoding of the user parameters down to the very final dispatc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/51] drm/i915: Rename 'flags' to 'dispatch_flags' for better code reading

2015-02-25 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:48:10AM +, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote: > From: John Harrison > > There is a flags word that is passed through the execbuffer code path all the > way from initial decoding of the user parameters down to the very final > dispatch > buffer call. It is simply call

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/51] drm/i915: Rename 'flags' to 'dispatch_flags' for better code reading

2015-02-13 Thread John . C . Harrison
From: John Harrison There is a flags word that is passed through the execbuffer code path all the way from initial decoding of the user parameters down to the very final dispatch buffer call. It is simply called 'flags'. Unfortuantely, there are many other flags words floating around in the same