[Mesa-dev] [PATCH] i965: Replace 'noann' debug flag with 'ann'.

[Ben Widawsky]

On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 08:57:27PM -0800, Ian Romanick wrote:
> On 12/05/2014 05:23 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 05:08:40PM -0800, Matt Turner wrote:
> >> ---
> >> Eric was against making this the default when I first suggested a flag.
> >> Have opinions changed since then? I rarely use the annotations, and they
> >> do make the assembly harder to read, when the assembly is what you're
> >> interested in.
> >>
> >>  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_asm_annotation.c | 2 +-
> >>  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_debug.c          | 2 +-
> >>  src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_debug.h          | 2 +-
> >>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_asm_annotation.c b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_asm_annotation.c
> >> index 37ad090..ac12655 100644
> >> --- a/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_asm_annotation.c
> >> +++ b/src/mesa/drivers/dri/i965/intel_asm_annotation.c
> >> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ void annotate(struct brw_context *brw,
> >>  
> >>     struct annotation *ann = &annotation->ann[annotation->ann_count++];
> >>     ann->offset = offset;
> >> -   if ((INTEL_DEBUG & DEBUG_NO_ANNOTATION) == 0) {
> >> +   if ((INTEL_DEBUG & DEBUG_ANNOTATION) != 0) {
> > 
> > if (INTEL_DEBUG & DEBUG_ANNOTATION)
> 
> Doesn't this result in a GCC warning?
> 

Perhaps I am missing something. Do you mean because there is no, '{'?
It should be fine, I think.

[snip]