From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] drm/ips: move drps/ips/ilk related
 variables into dev_priv->ips
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:52:39 -0700
Message-ID: <20120725165239.5311cb82@bwidawsk.net>
References: <1343165630-21604-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<1343165630-21604-9-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
	<20120725142520.6862b734@bwidawsk.net>
	<20120725213216.GH5396@phenom.ffwll.local>
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 cloud01.chad-versace.us (184-106-247-128.static.cloud-ips.com
	[184.106.247.128])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46C0A0DE3
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Wed, 25 Jul 2012 16:52:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120725213216.GH5396@phenom.ffwll.local>
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: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:32:16 +0200
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 02:25:20PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 23:33:49 +0200
> > Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > 
> > > Like with the equivalent change for gen6+ rps state, this helps in
> > > clarifying the code (and in fixing a few places that have fallen through
> > > the cracks in the locking review).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> > 
> > I don't think this patch is necessary, and doesn't belong in the series.
> > The series was about fixing a locking problem. If you want to submit
> > this as a separate patch, I'd prefer it.
> > 
> > If you're really determined to keep it, I'd roll it into the earlier
> > patches that did the rps renaming.
> 
> Well, you've already smashed your r-b onto the equivalent patch for the
> gen6+ rps code. But the real reason this belongs to this series is that
> I've used this rename (and the rps one) to actually figure out (with the
> help of the compiler) what is actually touched where and which parts
> belong together. 'Cause the current code is a rather decent mess.
> 
> -Daniel

You've shot down quite a few patches of mine (usually assertions) which
I've used for similar, 'this helped me track down an issue' purposes.

In any case, the r-b on the other one is because you're restructuring
the code you want to fix, before you fix it. That is fine. As I said,
if you want to put this as a beautifier, I don't think it belongs in
the series.

-- 
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center