From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jerome Glisse <glisse@freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] drm: kill drm_mm_node->private
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 00:04:15 +0200
Message-ID: <20100519220415.GA8827@barney.localdomain>
References: <1274217111-3882-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<1274217111-3882-4-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<20100519092507.GA3247@barney.localdomain>
	<20100519170332.GB3537@viiv.ffwll.ch>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100519170332.GB3537@viiv.ffwll.ch>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/dri-devel>,
	<mailto:dri-devel-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dri-devel-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel>,
	<mailto:dri-devel-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 07:03:32PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:25:07AM +0200, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 11:11:45PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > Only ever assigned, never used.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > 
> > NAK
> > 
> > private was to be use when doing range restricted allocation
> > somehow the patch that use it was drop/forgot/lost along the
> > was i will try to see i have it and redo it if not.
> 
> I don't agree for the following reasons:
> 1) drm_mm _does_ implement range-restricted allocations. And it does not
>    use the private pointer to do so. My new scanning algorithm doesn't
>    implement this (i915 doesn't use range restricted allocations), but
>    it's damn trivial to add.
> 2) The private pointer was used as a back-pointer to the object. If
>    something like this is needed, making struct drm_mm_node embedable
>    looks like the right approach (perhaps with some driver-private
>    bitfields to distinguish different case). I'm still in the process of
>    shooting down the driver_private gem_object pointer and I don't like
>    doing this right away again ...
> 
> Can you please point me to the code that needs this private pointer? Then I
> can see in which way I'm wrong ... ;)
> 

Ok fine, nuck it, i will readd it if needed once i have time
to get back to this.

Cheers,
Jerome