On Fri, 08 Sep 2017, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 05:01:42PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> > +configure_file(output: 'config.h', install: false, configuration:
>> > config_h)
>>
>> This makes me think config_h is a misnomer for the c
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 05:01:42PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Why?
> >
> > Because it's fast.
>
> And that's not even the main reason from my perspective! ;)
>
> Please find some comments inline. None of them are blockers.
>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
> >
>
On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Why?
>
> Because it's fast.
And that's not even the main reason from my perspective! ;)
Please find some comments inline. None of them are blockers.
BR,
Jani.
>
> Like really, really fast.
>
> Some data (from a snb laptop, so rather lower-powered):
>
Why?
Because it's fast.
Like really, really fast.
Some data (from a snb laptop, so rather lower-powered):
- Incremental build after $ touch lib/igt_core.c with meson: 0.6s
It notices that the symbol list of the libigt.so hasn't changed and
doesn't bother re-linking the almost 300 binaries w
