I kind of like the "util_" prefix everywhere. u_math only depends on p_config.h and p_compiler.h. I don't think it would be hard to move those two into src/util as well. We have always wanted Mesa to use more of Gallium. This might be a good start.
Just my 2 cents. Marek On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Jose Fonseca <jfons...@vmware.com> wrote: > On 07/02/15 00:10, Matt Turner wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> "util" is meant to be for shared utility across the entire code base - >>>> both Mesa and Gallium. It's been growing slowly as people move things >>>> there. It might make sense to move a lot of src/gallium/auxiliary/util >>>> there, in fact - there's always been a lot of duplication between Mesa >>>> and Gallium's utility code. But that's up to the Gallium developers. >>>> >>> Imho currently the util library is growing on the basis of "we can >>> share X let's throw it in there" rather than putting much thought >>> about the structure/"design" of it - unlike in gallium. >> >> >> Are you serious? Let's be honest with ourselves. I probably would have >> been a better plan to not put commonly useful code deep in Gallium in >> the first place. > > > Historic reasons, as Brian explained. Gallium was supposed to become a > dependency of Mesa but it didn't panned out. > >> Apparently this is what I get for trying to do the right thing an pull >> the atomics code out into a place the rest of the Mesa project can use >> it. > > > I really appreciate you went the extra mile there. And for me it's way more > important that we start sharing code than the naming structure. > > Especially when naming is subject to test/style whereas code reuse is > something everybody can readily agree on. > > If the outcome of this email thread would be to dicentivate you to share > more code, then that would be worst outcome indeed. > > Anyway, let's get out of this criticism spiral, and instead focus on how we > can solve the issues to everybody's satisfaction. > >> How about instead of an annoying bikeshed thread we just finish moving >> bits of Gallium's util directory to src/util and be done with it? > > > If renaming src/util is not something we can agree fine. Let's forget about > it. > > > But I don't think I (or anybody) has the time to move > src/gallium/auxiliary/util to src/util in one go. The code is entangled > with src/gallium/include . > > That is, moving the whole src/gaullium/auxiliary/util to src/util equals to > add gallium as dependency to whole mesa. If that's OK, then I agree with > Brian's suggestion: might as well do that (leave util in > src/gallium/axuliary ) and add src/gallium/* as includes/dependency > everwhere. > > I think for Mesa (src/mesa) this is fine. I'm not sure about src/glsl. > > Again, I suspect this won't be something we'll agree neither. > > > > So I'm back to the beginning: I want to move some math helpers from > src/gallium/auxiliary/util/u_math to somewhere inside src/util. I need > _some_ name: cgrt_*.h is no good, math.h would collide with standard C > headers, u_math.h would collide with src/gallium/auxiliary/util, so it must > be something else. I'm open to suggestions. If none I'll go with > mathhelpers.h > > > > Jose > > _______________________________________________ > mesa-dev mailing list > mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
