We've tried to avoid drm_i915_private_t for some time, but new uses keep
creeping in. Should we get rid of it once and for all?
Patches 1-7 are per file, patch 8 has the rest, patch 9 drops the
typedef. The first 8 can be applied in any order. Or squashed together
to reduce the patch count. Or if there are nasty conflicts on the way,
some can be postponed or dropped altogether for now.
BR,
Jani.
Jani Nikula (9):
drm/i915/debugfs: prefer struct drm_i915_private to
drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/dma: prefer struct drm_i915_private to drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/gem: prefer struct drm_i915_private to drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/irq: prefer struct drm_i915_private to drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/display: prefer struct drm_i915_private to
drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/ringbuffer: prefer struct drm_i915_private to
drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915/overlay: prefer struct drm_i915_private to
drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915: prefer struct drm_i915_private to drm_i915_private_t
drm/i915: drop the typedef for drm_i915_private_t
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_cmd_parser.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 46 ++++++------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c | 48 ++++++------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 10 +--
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 46 ++++++------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_debug.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_tiling.c | 6 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 110 ++++++++++++++--------------
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 22 +++---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_overlay.c | 24 +++---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 4 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 38 +++++-----
17 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 187 deletions(-)
--
1.7.9.5
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
