Am 01.07.2016 um 13:14 schrieb Emil Velikov:
Hi all,
On 29 June 2016 at 20:20, Christian König <deathsim...@vodafone.de> wrote:
Am 29.06.2016 um 18:35 schrieb Alex Deucher:
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Leo Liu <leo....@amd.com> wrote:
From: sonjiang <sonny.ji...@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: sonjiang <sonny.ji...@amd.com>
Cc: "12.0" <mesa-sta...@lists.freedesktop.org>
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deuc...@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koe...@amd.com> as well.
Here we have three patches, suggesting a bug with absolutely no
information what the issue is and/or why this approach is correct.
I'm sorry to say this, but as is, this series is not landing in
stable. Sonjiang, being the author of these please reply with a brief
justification why we want those. Before doing so I would strongly
recommend reading this [1] blog post.
Well to put a carrot on the front of your stick: I asked what the
firmware version patch is all about internally as well when I've seen
those patches. So it would have even made our internal review much
easier if Sonny added a commit message in the first place.
My fault to not requesting that his answer is put as a commit message on
the patches.
On the other hand this is for Polaris, we had time pressure to get it
out of the door and today is a public holiday in Canada. So you probably
won't get updated message before Monday.
Is that soon enough? Otherwise UVD will be broken on Polaris in the
stable branch.
Regards,
Christian.
Thanks
Emil
[1] http://who-t.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/on-commit-messages.html
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
