On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 01:07:24PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > wrote: > > At the moment, I'm more concerned about making sure our functions are > > consistently named and prefixed with the chipset they first work with. > > > > So we have: > > ?intel_ -> general functions, used by all > > ?i8xx_ -> gen2 > > ?i915_ -> gen3 (915/945) > > ?g33_, pineview_ -> gen3 (blk/pnv) # perhaps just g33 as pnv = g33 + mobile? > > ?i965_ -> gen4 (brw/crl) > > ?g4x_ -> gen4 (egl/ctg) > > ?ironlake_, sandybridge_, ivybridge_ -> etc > > > > So ironlake can call a g4x function, but never vice versa. > > Very-Much-Wanted-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> > > Can you put that somewhere prominent in the sources (a new file > naming_conventions.txt)? > Perhaps with the guidelines I've snipped away ... > -Daniel
Acked! Though I don't feel what you said is explicit enough, and therefore needs more clarity which Daniel asked for. ironlake should be able to call intel_*, and probably most g4x_*, but maybe it can't use some i965 functions, and certainly can't use many i8xx functions. Ben _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
