Hi Daniel,
On Monday 11 January 2016 14:51:46 Daniel Stone wrote:
> On 10 January 2016 at 23:48, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Saturday 09 January 2016 14:28:46 Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> @@ -353,18 +354,16 @@ static void drm_events_release(struct drm_file
> >> *file_priv) {
> >>
> >> struc
Hi,
On 10 January 2016 at 23:48, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> On Saturday 09 January 2016 14:28:46 Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> @@ -353,18 +354,16 @@ static void drm_events_release(struct drm_file
>> *file_priv) {
>> struct drm_device *dev = file_priv->minor->dev;
>> struct drm_pending_event
Hi Daniel,
Thank you for the patch.
On Saturday 09 January 2016 14:28:46 Daniel Vetter wrote:
> There's really no reason to not do so, instead of replicating this
> for every use-case and every driver. Now we can't just nuke the events,
> since that would still mean that all drm_event users would
There's really no reason to not do so, instead of replicating this
for every use-case and every driver. Now we can't just nuke the events,
since that would still mean that all drm_event users would need to know
when that has happened, since calling e.g. drm_send_event isn't allowed
any more. Instea
