On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
>
> It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
> then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
> already-rounded line duration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
Ping?
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/dr
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
>
> It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
> then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
> already-rounded line duration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
Ping?
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/dr
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
> then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
> already-rounded line duration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
>
Ping?
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/
On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
> then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
> already-rounded line duration.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
>
Ping?
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/
It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
already-rounded line duration.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c |6 +-
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff
It is a bit more precise to compute the total number of pixels first and
then divide, rather than multiplying the line pixel count by the
already-rounded line duration.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c |6 +-
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff
