On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:04:45PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 1 April 2015 at 22:26, Jerome Glisse j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 09:57:40PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
On 1 April 2015 at 21:34, Emil Velikov emil.l.velikov@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 April 2015 at 18:30, Jerome Glisse j.glisse@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 05:15:13PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
Missing definition and unused since their introduction.
Cc: Jerome Glisse jglisse@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov emil.l.velikov@gmail.com
NAK
I use all this in tools to debug lockup. Best course of action is to exclude bof.h from being distributed. My tools static link and i just point them to libdrm git tree.
Did not notice any mention of such out-of-tree tools in the commit that introduced these functions, so I've naively assumed that they are unused.
Scratch that - I'm blind.
Upon closer look at your radeondb repo, I cannot see any static linking in there. Also it seems that some of the functionality is duplicated between the two. With the radeondb version being out of date :'(
Yeah i guess i never pushed anywhere patches that did that, divergence btw my memory and what is out there. All this symbol can just be hidden and never exported. It would cleaner, but i still need the bof.h intact as i tend to just cp it afaict into my local radeondb copy so that i am in sync with libdrm code.
I can volunteer with the cleanup/integration of radeondb next to libdrm_radeon. If you update your repo (or push your work elsewhere), I could double-check, integrate and nuke the duplication. It will avoid the next person from coming over and trying to nuke things, the divergence mentioned, plus the copy/pasting of bof.[ch] every time you use the tool.
How does that sound ?
If you feel like it yes, but as i said i fear bof will stay relevant only for the duration xf86-video-ati is and i fear with the advance of the generic modesetting and glamor acceleration this might not last long. As mesa is using a different scheme to allow capture and replay of cs.
Anyway, the only tool that matter regarding bof is bofreplay from my joujou repository
git://people.freedesktop.org/~glisse/joujou
I used to have a tool to allow bisecting bof cs but it might have been lost in translation somewhere. Thought all is needed is a parameter to bofreplay to limit the number of dwords replayed.
Happy coding if you decide to go down that road :)
Cheers, Jérôme
Cheers, Emil