Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-16 Thread Egbert Eich
Dave Airlie writes: > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 00:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > > > This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and > > adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). > > why? :-) > > I'm pretty sure I NAKed the previous version because

Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Am 16.07.20 um 07:44 schrieb Thomas Zimmermann: > Hi > > Am 15.07.20 um 21:56 schrieb Dave Airlie: >> On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 00:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: >>> >>> This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and >>> adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521

Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
Hi Am 15.07.20 um 21:56 schrieb Dave Airlie: > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 00:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: >> >> This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and >> adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). > > why? :-) With G200 support in place, we can add als

Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Lyude Paul
Will try to look over this tomorrow, jfyi On Wed, 2020-07-15 at 16:58 +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and > adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). > > The first 7 patches prepare the driver. Desktop chips woul

Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 9:56 PM Dave Airlie wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 00:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > > > This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and > > adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). > > why? :-) > > I'm pretty sure I NAKed the p

Re: [PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Dave Airlie
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 00:59, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and > adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). why? :-) I'm pretty sure I NAKed the previous version because the userspace experience for these old cards

[PATCH 0/8] drm/mgag200: Support desktop chips

2020-07-15 Thread Thomas Zimmermann
This patchset puts device initialization in the correct order and adds support for G200 Desktop chips (PCI ids 0x520 and 0x521). The first 7 patches prepare the driver. Desktop chips would probably work without them, but since we're at it we can also do it right. Patch 1 enables cached page mappi