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

[Jani Nikula]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2018, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com> wrote:
> 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.

I don't think we've reached consensus on IS_GEN -> GT_GEN.

BR,
Jani.


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

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center