On 09/14/2015 07:04 PM, Brian Paul wrote: > On 09/14/2015 07:01 PM, Ian Romanick wrote: >> I looked at t_dd_dmatmp.h after the previous discussions about fixing >> the "count" problem. It was a mess. The first 5 patches fix the bug. >> The remaining 19 patches delete dead code and make the file adhere to >> Mesa's coding standards. >> >> t_dd_triemit.h and t_dd_dmatmp2.h could probably use some similar clean >> up. >> >> I don't have easy access to i915, radeon, or r200 hardware right now, so >> I am only able to compile test this series. I won't be able to test it >> on hardware until after XDC (next week). > > I have a minor comment on patch 10 which could be addressed in a follow-on. > > Patch 19 does more than formatting changes (the second to last hunk is a > code transformation, but looks correct).
I was putting that (and the changes from if-statements to ?: in other patches) under the loose umbrella of "formatting fixes". :) > Anyway, the series looks good to me (though I can't test it either). Marius noticed a problem in one of the patches, so I'm definitely going to wait until I can test both i915 and radeon before pushing. > Reviewed-by: Brian Paul <bri...@vmware.com> _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
