On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:24:06PM +0300, ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> > > There are quite a few variables we need to take into account to > determine the maximum watermark levels, so it feels a bit cleaner > to calculate those rather than just have a bunch of what look like > magic numbers.
Any chance I can have num_pipes_active? I'm weird, but I keep expecting pipes_active to a bitmask. (This comment applies to everywhere we have a x_active counter :) s/othwerwise/otherwise/ > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrj...@linux.intel.com> Reads well, very well. Checked through a couple of the values, and it seems consistent, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
