[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: Save some lines of source code in workarounds

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 04/01/2019 12:01, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-04 11:40:53)
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> No functional or code size change - just notice we can compact the source
>> by re-using a single helper for adding workarounds.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c | 32 +++++-------------------
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c
>> index ffc96c8b849b..a8161324108d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_workarounds.c
>> @@ -142,7 +142,8 @@ static void _wa_add(struct i915_wa_list *wal, const struct i915_wa *wa)
>>   }
>>   
>>   static void
>> -__wa_add(struct i915_wa_list *wal, i915_reg_t reg, u32 mask, u32 val)
>> +wa_write_masked_or(struct i915_wa_list *wal, i915_reg_t reg, u32 mask,
>> +                  u32 val)
> 
> This looked odd, since I was thinking that __wa_add() remained the
> better name for adding the actual i915_wa_list, but __wa_add() is just
> perplexingly the wrapper for _wa_add()
> 
> For both,
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>

I am not too proud with my used of single and double underscores here. 
:I And I was also thinking about why not just keep __wa_add as the 
common adder. Even had a version with _wa_add renamed to __wa_add, and 
then _wa_add etc. Maybe I need to have another go at it.

Regards,

Tvrtko