On Fri 20 Nov 2015, Nanley Chery wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Brian Paul <brian.e.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Ian Romanick <i...@freedesktop.org> wrote:
> >> I think #2 might be better, but there's a lot of churn. I don't know > >> that we want that much churn right around the time of the release branch > >> point, and I think it would be good to have this resolved in 11.1. I > >> also have a few bits of feedback in #2, so it might take a couple > >> iterations before that could land. > >> > >> > > Since 11.1 is coming up, can we go with the simpler #1 for now, then go to > > #2 after 11.1 branches? > > > > > I don't mind going this route. Unfortunately, I'm running into presently > unexplainable linker errors in the process of making the gtest for this > feature. Nanley, you're branch has two patches. If you remove the gtest patch (patch #2) from your branch, does everything work as expected? If so, then I think it's best to get patch #1 into 11.1 before the Emil creates the branchpoint, and worry about the gtest afterwards. _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
