On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 17:24 +0100, José Fonseca wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 09:08 -0700, Joakim Sindholt wrote:
> > Hi.
> > I just had a look at debug options in u_debug, specifically enumerated
> > options in debug_get_flags_option(). It stands out that struct
> > debug_named_value doesn't have a description field, as is used in r300g.
> > I'm guessing that for this reason, r300g has it's own system, and I'm
> > reluctant to use it as well.
> > It can be quite useful to have a description available; especially when
> > you have options named "fp", "vp", "cs", "rs", "fb", etc. that aren't
> > exactly descriptive in their own right (at least for people unfamiliar
> > with the driver).
> >
> > Would it be acceptable to add a description field to debug_named_value?
>
> I think it might be useful.
>
> Just make sure NULL is valid description and ensure that the existing
> code is doesn't break or is fixed.
>
> E.g., add a new DEBUG_NAMED_VALUE_WITH_DESCRIPTION macro and keep
> DEBUG_NAMED_VALUE with the same number of args.
>
> Jose
>
I devised a path that will output something like this:
debug_get_flags_option: help for NINE_DEBUG:
| lib [0x00000001] Debugging information on library interface
| xnine [0x00000002] Show X11 winsys information
debug_get_flags_option: NINE_DEBUG = 0x0 (help)
Any comments on the layout? Anything that should be aligned differently?
Each argument is printed out with a pretty ugly format string:
debug_printf("| %*s [0x%0*lx]%s%s\n", namealign, flags->name,
sizeof(unsigned long)*CHAR_BIT/4, flags->value,
flags->desc ? " " : "", flags->desc ? flags->desc : "");
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
