On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 13:47:52 -0700 Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:41:56 +0100 > Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote: > > > > > + /* DP has a bunch of special case unfortunately, so mark the pipe > > + * accordingly. */ > > + bool has_dp_encoder; > > Looks pretty good, but I don't think this field is used anywhere? > Maybe it belongs in a later patch? > > Also, this makes me wonder if we should be clearing the m_n regs > somewhere and asserting for them in a few places. > > Definitely looks better than the current code though; CPU vs PCH writes > sprinkled all about, and FDI thrown into the mix. > > It's probably a bit unfair to say the HSW mode set is confused though; > it's just using existing code as best it can. These new bits are > definitely clearer though. > Oh and with the new field moved to another patch: Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
