Hello Thomas!
> No it's not. Major code abstractions behind preprocessor tokens are
> terrible to maintain.
Hmm, don't get me wrong but I'm not sure if the changes were really
checked in detail. At first sight it might look like I'm adding tons of
new macro ridden code in those header files repl
> Some notes regarding your patches:
> - please add dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org mailing list
Will do next time.
> - it seems you sent your patches manually.
Yes, I thought it will work after a bit of practice without mistakes. Sorry.
> - patch #2 is missing, and patches 1-5 have the same s
> +cc Kajtar, who has kindly smoke tested this series on real hardware and
> confirmed things are working ostensibly the same as before.
>
> On this basis I will be un-RFC'ing this and, if Kajtar can reply to
> confirm, will add a Tested-by tag to patch 3/3.
No problem, I'm glad I could help. Usi
