[ Cc'ing Florian Mickler and Keith Packard ]
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 09:07:47PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >> Hello Chris, everyone,
> >&
Keith,
first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>
> > And now after v3.0 is out, I've tested it again, and yes, like it was
> > broken
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:23:36 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>
> > What kind of a workaround are you talking about?
>
> Just reverting the commit -- that makes your machine work, even if it's
> wrong for oth
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> > You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at
> > this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality
&g
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> >
> >>
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> Keith,
>
> first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >
>
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > Keith,
> >
> > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wr
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > >
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:02:59PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > >
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:56:01AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is
> > it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no
> > in
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >> If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those
> >> particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers.
> >
> &g
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:41:44AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup
> > obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do,
> > and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project.
>
> You seem confused. If
Hello Chris, everyone,
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote:
> > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Fri, 20 May 2011 11:08:56 -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> > > > [ Adding Chris Wilson (author
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> Hello Chris, everyone,
>
> On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote:
> > > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chri
15 matches
Mail list logo
