On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]> wrote: > I saw some mention somewhere on IS_GEN_RANGE, which looked clearer than > IS_GEN(dev_priv, s, e). Presumably that did not go anywhere since now > the proposal is the above? I have to say I am not sure it reads > completely intuitive when seen near in code: > > IS_GEN(dev_priv, 9) > IS_GEN(dev_priv, 8, 9) > > Looks like a variable arg list and the difference in semantics does not > come through. As such I am leaning towards thinking it is too much churn > for unclear benefit. Or in other words I thought IS_GEN_RANGE was a > better direction.
Okay, thanks for the feedback. I'm not locked into any resolution yet, apart from not churning anything until we have a better picture where we're going. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
