Op 04-08-17 om 12:02 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> Here you go, compile tested version. :)
>>> 8<
>>> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
>>> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only
Op 04-08-17 om 12:02 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> Here you go, compile tested version. :)
>>> 8<
>>> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
>>> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> Here you go, compile tested version. :)
>> 8<
>> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
>> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
>> legacy userspace we know that this will
Hi,
> Here you go, compile tested version. :)
> 8<
> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
> legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
> ioctl code. And never on so
Op 02-08-17 om 10:02 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Laurent Pinchart
> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 01 Aug 2017 07:59:13 Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>>> + pri_state = drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state(crtc->primary,
>>> state->state);
>>> + if (pri_state) {
>>> +
On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 Aug 2017 07:59:13 Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> + pri_state = drm_atomic_get_new_plane_state(crtc->primary,
>> state->state);
>> + if (pri_state) {
>> + struct omap_crtc_state *omap_crtc_state =
>> +
Hi Maarten,
On Tuesday 01 Aug 2017 07:59:13 Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 31-07-17 om 17:42 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> > I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
> > getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
> > legacy userspace we know that thi
Op 31-07-17 om 17:42 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
> legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
> ioctl code. And never on some other free-st
I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
ioctl code. And never on some other free-standing state struct, where
this old hack wouldn't wo
Hi Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 31 Jul 2017 14:45:16 Daniel Vetter wrote:
> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
> legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
ioctl code. And never on some other free-standing state struct, where
this old hack wouldn't wo
Hi Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
On Monday 31 Jul 2017 12:54:19 Daniel Vetter wrote:
> I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
> getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
s/propety/property/
> legacy userspace we know that this will onl
I want/need to rework the core property handling, and this hack is
getting in the way. But since it's a non-standard propety only used by
legacy userspace we know that this will only every be called from
ioctl code. And never on some other free-standing state struct, where
this old hack wouldn't wo
13 matches
Mail list logo
