[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Include active flag when describing objects in debugfs

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 03/19/2015 09:05 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:41:26PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 03/09/2015 09:55 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> Since we use obj->active as a hint in many places throughout the code,
>>> knowing its state in debugfs is extremely useful.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 3 ++-
>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> index 042ad2fec484..809f6eadc10c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
>>> @@ -123,8 +123,9 @@ describe_obj(struct seq_file *m, struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
>>>   	struct i915_vma *vma;
>>>   	int pin_count = 0;
>>>
>>> -	seq_printf(m, "%pK: %s%s%s %8zdKiB %02x %02x %x %x %x%s%s%s",
>>> +	seq_printf(m, "%pK: %s%s%s%s %8zdKiB %02x %02x %x %x %x%s%s%s",
>>>   		   &obj->base,
>>> +		   obj->active ? "*" : " ",
>>
>> %c etc would maybe be more compact code? (Hey I have to earn my
>> bike-shedding badge somehow! ;) Anyway,
>
> The rationale for the empty flags to use " " was to keep the fields
> aligned. I'm still about 60:40 whether that was a good idea in terms of
> formatting the debugfs files.

Doesn't matter really, my joke was only about two chars being smaller 
than two one-char strings, weak joke yes. :)

Regards,

Tvrtko