On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 10:53, Lyude Paul wrote:
>
> I -thought- I had fixed this entirely, but it looks like that I didn't
> test this thoroughly enough as we apparently still make one big mistake
> with nv50_msto_atomic_check() - we don't handle the following scenario:
>
> * CRTC #1 has n VCPI all
I -thought- I had fixed this entirely, but it looks like that I didn't
test this thoroughly enough as we apparently still make one big mistake
with nv50_msto_atomic_check() - we don't handle the following scenario:
* CRTC #1 has n VCPI allocated to it, is attached to connector DP-4
which is atta
