On 02/21/2012 01:08 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:59:38 -0800, Kenneth Graunke<kenn...@whitecape.org>
wrote:
Signed-off-by: Kenneth Graunke<kenn...@whitecape.org>
A task for a rainy afternoon would be to rigorously use the verbose
PCI_ID_* names rather than the raw values.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson<ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
intel/intel_chipset.h | 2 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/intel/intel_chipset.h b/intel/intel_chipset.h
index e3a30fc..1b6e357 100644
--- a/intel/intel_chipset.h
+++ b/intel/intel_chipset.h
@@ -96,8 +96,6 @@
dev == 0x2E22 || \
dev == 0x2E32 || \
dev == 0x2E42 || \
Note that these 5 IDs are part of IS_G4X, can you kill them as well (in
another patch).
-Chris
Hm. I guess I consider G4X to be part of GEN4. At least in Mesa, G4X
is explicitly included:
#define IS_GEN4(devid) (devid == ... || ... || IS_G4X(devid))
Using that instead of hardcoding the IDs would be cleaner, though.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
