[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/7] drm/i915: pass status instead of enable flags to i915_enable_pipestat

[Daniel Vetter]

On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 03:35:15PM +0000, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> I almost think we should just separate enable vs status entirely.  As
> long as the bits are named consistently it may be easier to follow (as
> Ville found in your next patch with the subtle remapping of status
> bits).

Yeah, I think for cases where the hw engineers just made a mess of it it's
better to be explicit. So what about keeping the current pipestat
enable/disable functions as wrappers which assume a regular mapping
betweeen status and mask bit, and then add a low-level function which
takes both mask and status explicitly?

That way we have less churn in the code, mostly pipestat enable/disable
still looks sane but the irregular cases will really stick out. For a name
I'd just go with __i915_enable_pipestat for lack of better ideas. Or maybe
i915_enable_pipestat_irregular.

Merged the patches thus far in this series to dinq.

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