From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/18] drm: Introduce an iterator over holes
	in the drm_mm range manager
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2012 15:13:10 +0000
Message-ID: <84c8a8$6dc1qr@orsmga001.jf.intel.com>
References: <1350666204-8101-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<1350666204-8101-5-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<20121105134106.4a5ea71d@bwidawsk.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4059F0EF
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Mon,  5 Nov 2012 07:14:24 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20121105134106.4a5ea71d@bwidawsk.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 13:41:06 +0000, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:03:11 +0100
> Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> > -		BUG_ON(drm_mm_hole_node_start(node)
> > -				!= drm_mm_hole_node_end(node));
> > +		BUG_ON(node->start + node->size !=
> > +		       list_entry(node->node_list.next,
> > +				  struct drm_mm_node, node_list)->start);
> > +
> > 
> 
> This seems harder to read to me than before. I suspect you've changed it
> only because you've moved the inline functions down, but I also don't
> understand the reason for that.

Since I move the BUG_ON() into drm_mm_hole_node_end() and this is the
atypical caller, I chose to make this code less clear in order to make
the other callsites clearer. The other choice is to use
__drm_mm_hole_node_end(), which is probably worthwhile.

> > +
> > +/* Note that we need to unroll list_for_each_entry in order to inline
> > + * setting hole_start and hole_end on each iteration and keep the
> > + * macro sane.
> > + */
> 
> This comment is probably better suited for the commit message then here
> where it'd require git blame to make any sense of it.

No, I think list_for_each_entry() is a common macro that the reader
might have expected to see and so we need to explain why we cannot use
it here.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre