On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:54:27AM -0800, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:28:36 +0100, Daniel Vetter
> wrote:
> > Half of the users actually don't want just no tracing, but need to
> > avoid the forcewake dance for correctness. So add new variants
> > __I915_READ and __I915_WRITE fo
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 01:28:36 +0100, Daniel Vetter
wrote:
> Half of the users actually don't want just no tracing, but need to
> avoid the forcewake dance for correctness. So add new variants
> __I915_READ and __I915_WRITE for that.
I'd sure like something more descriptive than '__' here. Perhaps
Half of the users actually don't want just no tracing, but need to
avoid the forcewake dance for correctness. So add new variants
__I915_READ and __I915_WRITE for that.
Also improve the _NOTRACE variants to do the forcewake dance.
Currently not required because the only user is the i2c code, which
