Op 15-05-17 om 15:52 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:41:22AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Op 11-05-17 om 11:23 schreef Daniel Vetter:
>>> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:28:43AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
We shouldn't inspect crtc->state, instead grab the crtc state.
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 11:41:22AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Op 11-05-17 om 11:23 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:28:43AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> >> We shouldn't inspect crtc->state, instead grab the crtc state.
> >> At this point the hw state verifier should
Op 11-05-17 om 11:23 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:28:43AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> We shouldn't inspect crtc->state, instead grab the crtc state.
>> At this point the hw state verifier should be able to run even if
>> crtc->state has been updated (which cannot curre
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 10:28:43AM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> We shouldn't inspect crtc->state, instead grab the crtc state.
> At this point the hw state verifier should be able to run even if
> crtc->state has been updated (which cannot currently happen).
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhor
We shouldn't inspect crtc->state, instead grab the crtc state.
At this point the hw state verifier should be able to run even if
crtc->state has been updated (which cannot currently happen).
Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 24 ++--
