Ignore this, all kinds of patches from wrong tree stuff going on here.
Dave.
On 27 June 2017 at 07:19, Dave Airlie wrote:
> From: Dave Airlie
>
> This adds the corresponding code for libdrm to use the new
> kernel interfaces for semaphores.
>
> This will be used by radv to implement shared sema
Hi Dave,
Barring the other discussions, allow me to put a couple of trivial suggestions:
Please re-wrap the long lines to follow existing code style.
On 14 March 2017 at 00:50, Dave Airlie wrote:
> @@ -882,6 +894,12 @@ int amdgpu_cs_submit(amdgpu_context_handle context,
>
Am 15.03.2017 um 09:48 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 01:01:19AM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
While it's nice that you are all having fun here, I don't think that's
the way to communicate this.
The truth is, if AMD had an open source driver using the semaphores
(e.g. Vulkan) and if
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 01:01:19AM +0100, Marek Olšák wrote:
> While it's nice that you are all having fun here, I don't think that's
> the way to communicate this.
>
> The truth is, if AMD had an open source driver using the semaphores
> (e.g. Vulkan) and if the libdrm semaphore code was merged,
While it's nice that you are all having fun here, I don't think that's
the way to communicate this.
The truth is, if AMD had an open source driver using the semaphores
(e.g. Vulkan) and if the libdrm semaphore code was merged, Dave
wouldn't be able to change it, ever. If a dependent open source
pr
Am 14.03.2017 um 18:45 schrieb Harry Wentland:
On 2017-03-14 06:04 AM, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 17:20, Christian König wrote:
Am 14.03.2017 um 09:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:30:40AM +0800, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 14 March 20
On 2017-03-14 06:04 AM, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 17:20, Christian König wrote:
Am 14.03.2017 um 09:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:30:40AM +0800, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
Hi Dave,
Could yo
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Harry Wentland wrote:
>>> "internal teams simply do not have design authority on stuff like that"
>>>
>>> Can I print that on a t-shirt and start to sell it?
>>
>> I guess you cannot dress it to go to office..:)
>>
>
> I'd wear it to the office.
>
> https://www.cus
On 2017年03月14日 17:20, Christian König wrote:
Am 14.03.2017 um 09:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:30:40AM +0800, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
Hi Dave,
Could you tell me why you create your new one pa
Am 14.03.2017 um 09:54 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:30:40AM +0800, zhoucm1 wrote:
On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
Hi Dave,
Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send out
our the whole impleme
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 02:16:11PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> On 14 March 2017 at 13:30, zhoucm1 wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Dave,
> >>>
> >>> Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:30:40AM +0800, zhoucm1 wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> > >
> > > Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send out
> > > our the whole implementation, Why not
On 14 March 2017 at 13:30, zhoucm1 wrote:
>
>
> On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send
>>> out
>>> our the whole implementation, Why not directly revie
On 2017年03月14日 10:52, Dave Airlie wrote:
On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
Hi Dave,
Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send out
our the whole implementation, Why not directly review our patches?
This is patch review, I'm not sure what you are expecting
On 14 March 2017 at 12:00, zhoucm1 wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send out
> our the whole implementation, Why not directly review our patches?
This is patch review, I'm not sure what you are expecting in terms of
direct review.
The patche
Hi Dave,
Could you tell me why you create your new one patch? I remember I send
out our the whole implementation, Why not directly review our patches?
Thanks,
David Zhou
On 2017年03月14日 08:50, Dave Airlie wrote:
From: Dave Airlie
This adds the corresponding code for libdrm to use the new
ke
16 matches
Mail list logo
