On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 03:05:19PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:54:57 -0800
> Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > IGT is newer and arguably better. This change doesn't completely merge
> > the files because it's a bit simpler if we move the I9XX macro over to
> > IGT, and don't move
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:54:57 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> IGT is newer and arguably better. This change doesn't completely merge
> the files because it's a bit simpler if we move the I9XX macro over to
> IGT, and don't move over a few macros from IGT that libdrm doesn't care
> about.
>
> The adva
On Sun, 10 Feb 2013 09:54:57 -0800
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> IGT is newer and arguably better. This change doesn't completely merge
> the files because it's a bit simpler if we move the I9XX macro over to
> IGT, and don't move over a few macros from IGT that libdrm doesn't care
> about.
>
> The adva
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 14:27:08 -0800
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:51:48 +0100
> Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:30 AM, kbuild test robot
> > wrote:
> > > tree: git://people.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel.git
> > > drm-intel-nightly
> > > head: 69f0d09d
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 10:51:48 +0100
Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:30 AM, kbuild test robot
> wrote:
> > tree: git://people.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel.git drm-intel-nightly
> > head: 69f0d09dfd2d0579241389aee18ba50aa39d0de2
> > commit: d6bc5b0603e5bea1b5a214d21c0aba851
It's not that the assertion is incorrect, but rather that we can call
do_destroy early in loading, and we will falsely BUG().
Since contexts have been in for a while now, and in the internal APIs
are pretty stable, it should be fairly safe to remove this.
v2: Remove unused dev_priv, and dev
Sign
It's not that the assertion is incorrect, but rather that we can call
do_destroy early in loading, and we will falsely BUG().
Since contexts have been in for a while now, and in the internal APIs
are pretty stable, it should be fairly safe to remove this.
Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky
---
drivers
At Sun, 10 Feb 2013 02:16:14 +0100,
David Härdeman wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 07, 2013 at 11:00:13AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 10:35:33PM +0100, David Härdeman wrote:
> >> I'll break etiquette here and include the entire original message below
> >> (and top-post!) since I'
Dear Chris,
Am Sonntag, den 10.02.2013, 23:21 + schrieb Chris Wilson:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:37:03PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 10.02.2013, 19:38 + schrieb Chris Wilson:
> > > Reading the cspec pays dividends once again, as I found the 'Base of
> > > Stolen Memory