[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 3/7] drm/i915: replace IS_GEN<N> with GT_GEN(..., N)

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 02:42:59PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 01:51:19PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> >> Define GT_GEN() similarly to our GT_GEN_RANGE() and convert users of
> >> IS_GEN<N> to pss the gen as parameter. This prepares for the addition
> >> of display gen checks by renaming the IS_GENx() and using common code
> >> for all the n gens.
> >> 
> >> The following spatch was used to convert the users of these macros:
> >> 
> >> @@
> >> expression e;
> >> @@
> >> (
> >> - IS_GEN2(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 2)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN3(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 3)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN4(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 4)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN5(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 5)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN6(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 6)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN7(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 7)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN8(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 8)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN9(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 9)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN10(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 10)
> >> |
> >> - IS_GEN11(e)
> >> + GT_GEN(e, 11)
> >> )
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> 
> I think this is a contentious patch. I am not sure I agree with the
> change. Please hold off on merging until further discussion.

Yeap. I just reviewed the ones that no body raised any issue yet.
So it would pop up on their inbox again for a double change to complain.

I didn't add reviewed on the patches we are still discussing exactly
to avoid merging it without finishing the discussions.

Thanks,
Rodrigo.

> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Jani.
> 
> -- 
> Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center