[Mesa-dev] [RFC] brw_context + intel_context = <?>

[Kenneth Graunke]

On 07/02/2013 12:34 PM, Chad Versace wrote:
> I second Marek's concern. Having intel_context defined differently
> in two locations will cause nightmares in editors. It's possible,
> but with much pain, to workaround that nightmare in Eclipse, but I'd
> rather avoid it.

Seems reasonable to me.

> I dislike  brw_context, because it doesn't match all the other naming
> conventions in the driver. Symbols are prefixed with one of
>    - intel, for generation-independent code
>    - genN, for generation-specific code, perhaps forward-compatible
>    - brw, for gen4-specific code, perhaps forward-compatible

Well...intel_* used to be gen2+, while brw_* was gen4+.

Now that we've forked the shared code, intel_* and brw_* are both 
essentially generation-independent.

> If we're going to make the effort to rename everything, we might as well
> name things consistently. I don't feel that brw is consistent with the
> majority of the codebase. As Eric said, it really does feel archaic.
>
> I vote for gen_context or i965_context, but I won't cry if you choose
> brw_context. Just please please please don't choose intel_context.

One other option is to rename intel_context in the i915 directory, but 
there isn't a terribly clear name there.  i915_context is bad, since 
810/830/915/945 are meaningful differences.  gen3_context is bad since 
it's for gen2 too.  So I'm inclined to just leave it as intel_context.

--Ken