On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:25:33AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 03/04/2019 09:15, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:58 PM Tvrtko Ursulin
wrote:
On 03/04/2019 02:46, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
No reason to stick to u32 for platform mask if we can just use more bits
on 64 bit p
On 03/04/2019 09:15, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:58 PM Tvrtko Ursulin
wrote:
On 03/04/2019 02:46, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
No reason to stick to u32 for platform mask if we can just use more bits
on 64 bit platforms.
$ size drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.ko*
text
On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 11:58 PM Tvrtko Ursulin
wrote:
>
>
> On 03/04/2019 02:46, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> > No reason to stick to u32 for platform mask if we can just use more bits
> > on 64 bit platforms.
> >
> > $ size drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.ko*
> > text data bss dec h
On 03/04/2019 02:46, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
No reason to stick to u32 for platform mask if we can just use more bits
on 64 bit platforms.
$ size drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.ko*
text data bss dec hex filename
1884779 413345408 1931521 1d7901 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i9
No reason to stick to u32 for platform mask if we can just use more bits
on 64 bit platforms.
$ size drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.ko*
textdata bss dec hex filename
1884779 413345408 1931521 1d7901 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915.ko
1886693 413585408 1933459 1d8093 drivers/g
