On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 08:41:02AM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: > On 15/06/15 21:20, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> + struct ida ctx_ids; > >> + uint32_t log_flags; > >> + int db_cacheline; > >> + DECLARE_BITMAP(doorbell_bitmap, I915_MAX_DOORBELLS); > >> + > >> + /* Action status & statistics */ > >> + uint64_t action_count; /* Total commands issued */ > >> + uint32_t action_cmd; /* Last command word */ > >> + uint32_t action_status; /* Last return status */ > >> + uint32_t action_fail; /* Total number of failures */ > >> + int32_t action_err; /* Last error code */ > > > > Any group of prefix_ immediately raises the question of "why isn't this > > a struct?" > > -Chris > > Not really worth making and naming a struct. There's only one instance > of this whole thing; the code that updates these touches them > individually, and the debugfs code that prints them can't really make > use of them collectively either.
We have a lot of single-instance structs all over the place to group related data around. It imo does help a lot, but yeah might be on the fence here. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
