On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Mateo Lozano, Oscar <oscar.ma...@intel.com> wrote: >> > v2: Leave the old backing object pointer behind. Daniel Vetter >> > suggested using a union, but it makes more sense to keep render_obj as >> > a NULL pointer behind, to make sure no one uses it incorrectly when >> > Execlists are enabled, similar to what we are doing with ring->buffer >> > (Rusty's API level 5). > > Not sure if you agree with this or you still prefer the union?
Well the union has the same idea but using less space. Not really worth here though at all, so I'm ok with your approach. In any case subclassing is usually the better approach than having a union. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
