On 2017-04-24 11:25 AM, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Christian König > <deathsimple at vodafone.de> wrote: >> I wanted to push that to our internal branch, but found that it doesn't >> apply cleanly. So please rebase on alex amd-staging-4.9 branch. > > Please stick with my drm-next-wip tree. It will make it easier for me > to integrate. > > Alex > > I'm guessing the tradeoff here would be a delay getting into drm-next. I'm okay with that as long as the patch series makes it in time for the 4.13 feature merge window. One exception, I would like to get the IOCTL interface patch submitted into a branch that will land on drm-next sooner rather than later so that I can begin submitting the corresponding patches to the userspace components. Should this be amd-staging-4.9? Or should it be somewhere else? Regards, Andres >> >> Additional to that you forgot my rb on patch #4. >> >> Regards, >> Christian. >> >> >> Am 22.04.2017 um 01:48 schrieb Andres Rodriguez: >>> >>> V2 updates: >>> * Rebased >>> * All patches now have r-b >>> >>> Second part of the split of the series: >>> Add support for high priority scheduling in amdgpu v8 >>> >>> These patches should be close to being good enough to land. >>> >>> The first two patches are simple fixes I've ported from the ROCm branch. >>> These >>> still need review. >>> >>> I've fixed all of Christian's comments for patch 04: >>> drm/amdgpu: implement lru amdgpu_queue_mgr policy for compute v4 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> amd-gfx mailing list >>> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org >>> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> amd-gfx mailing list >> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
