On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2012-12-01 at 13:53 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> This is for legacy legacy stuff, and checking with the leftover >> pipe from the previous loop is propably not what we want. Since >> pipe == 2 after the loop ... > > This doesn't seem to match the change, blc_event is simply never used > here. Oops, indeed. Somehow I've thought there's the function call right there. Will adjust the commit message a bit when applying. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
