[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 30/66] drm/i915: Getter/setter for object attributes

[Ben Widawsky]

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 09:28:56AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:59:51PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 09:08:58PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > >> All of this is addressed in future patches. As we've discussed, I think
> > > >> I'll have to respin it anyway, so I'll name it as such upfront. To me it
> > > >> felt a little weird to start calling things "ggtt" before I made the
> > > >> separation.
> > > >
> > > > I think now that we know what the end result should (more or less at
> > > > least) look like we can aim to make it right the first time we touch a
> > > > piece of code. That will reduce the churn in the patch series and so
> > > > make the beast easier to review.
> > > >
> > > > Imo foreshadowing (to keep consistent with the "a patch series should
> > > > tell a story" analogy) is perfectly fine, and in many cases helps in
> > > > understanding the big picture of a large pile of patches.
> > > 
> > > I've forgotten to add one thing: If you switch these again later on
> > > (layz me didn't check for that) it's imo best to stick with those
> > > names (presuming they fit, since the gtt_size vs. obj->size
> > > disdinction is a rather important one). Again I think now that we know
> > > where to go to it's best to get there with as few intermediate steps
> > > as possible.
> > > -Daniel
> > >
> > 
> > I don't recall object size being very important actually, so I don't
> > think the distinction is too important, but I'm just arguing for the
> > sake of arguing. With the sg page stuff that Imre did, I think most size
> > calculations unrelated to gtt size are there anyway, and most of our mm
> > (not page allocation) code should only ever care about the gtt.
> 
> The disdinction is only important on gen2/3, which is why you don't recall
> it being important ;-)
> 
> I think you have two options:
> - Trust me that it's indeed important.
> - Read up on gen2/3 fencing code and make up your own mind.
> 
> Cheers, Daniel
I am not saying the distinction doesn't exist. I was saying it's not
prevalent in too many places. See the second part of my statement, I
believe it holds.

But please be clear what you're asking for, do you want 2 getters for
vma size vs. obj size?

> -- 
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center