On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Ian Romanick <i...@freedesktop.org> wrote: > On 02/10/2016 12:35 PM, Matt Turner wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Ben Widawsky >> <benjamin.widaw...@intel.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:35:45AM -0800, Matt Turner wrote: >>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Sameer Kibey <sameer.ki...@intel.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Update the format in which workarounds are documented >>>>> in the source code. This allows mesa to be parsed >>>>> by the list-workarounds utility in intel-gpu-tools. >>>> >>>> I don't know that I find this valuable. >>>> >>>> Ben touched on one concern -- keeping it updated. But I have another, >>>> and that's whether the information is accurate, or useful at all. >>> >>> I think the bottom line is it really doesn't hurt the existing situation. >>> The > > Paraphrasing what Matt says below... It hurts the existing situation > because it gives us a false sense of security.
Thanks. Yeah, that is a good way of putting it, and it reminds me of the time when Fulsim wrongly told me that there was a problem $here, but didn't say anything about the actual problem $there. Providing wrong information is significantly worse than providing no information. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
