Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: simplify sysfs setup code

2012-06-01 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 09:32:15AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Thu, 31 May 2012 14:57:43 +0200 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > Positively checking for the required feature/gen is simpler than build > > a cascade of negative "we need to bail" checks. And the later won't > > scale if we add more s

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: simplify sysfs setup code

2012-05-31 Thread Ben Widawsky
On Thu, 31 May 2012 14:57:43 +0200 Daniel Vetter wrote: > Positively checking for the required feature/gen is simpler than build > a cascade of negative "we need to bail" checks. And the later won't > scale if we add more stuff that doesn't fit in nicely. > > Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter Review

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/3] drm/i915: simplify sysfs setup code

2012-05-31 Thread Daniel Vetter
Positively checking for the required feature/gen is simpler than build a cascade of negative "we need to bail" checks. And the later won't scale if we add more stuff that doesn't fit in nicely. Signed-Off-by: Daniel Vetter --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_sysfs.c | 24 +++- 1