On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen
wrote:
> On 15/06/13 15:20, Rob Clark wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested. Perhaps the first test that people w
On 15/06/13 15:20, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
>>> ---
>>> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
>>> hardware might do, is to test _be
On 15/06/13 15:20, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
>>> ---
>>> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
>>> hardware might do, is to test _be
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> On 15/06/13 15:20, Rob Clark wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested. Perhaps the first test that people wi
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 08:48:22PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
> ---
> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
> set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed a
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
>> ---
>> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
>> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
>>
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
>> ---
>> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
>> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
>>
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 08:48:22PM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
> ---
> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
> set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed a
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
> ---
> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
> set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed at all.
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 20:48 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
> ---
> Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
> hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
> set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed at all.
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed at all. Or is it
obvious?
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/Kconfig | 2 +-
1 f
Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle
---
Untested. Perhaps the first test that people with access to the relevant
hardware might do, is to test _before applying this patch_ with FB_OMAP2
set. Perhaps this negative dependency isn't needed at all. Or is it
obvious?
drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/Kconfig | 2 +-
1 f
12 matches
Mail list logo
