2012/11/7 Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com> > On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 18:31 +0900, Inki Dae wrote: > > 2012/11/2 Imre Deak <imre.deak at intel.com> > > The patchset adds the missing event_lock when accessing the > > vblank_event_list in drm_vblank_off() and as preparation for > > this > > also fixes a few other issues in the exynos driver. > > This is also a dependency for Rob Clark's > > drm_send_vblank_event() > > rework as that would trigger a warning for the unhold > > event_lock without > > this changeset. > > The exynos changes are only compile tested, the rest is tested > > on an > > Intel IVB machine on top of drm-intel-nightly + > > drm_send_vblank_event() > > rework, with i-g-t/flip_test. > > Hi Imre, > > Works fine. But we should wait for Rob's patch set to be merged to > > -next, and this may be rebased on top of latest Rob's patch set again. > > Ok, thanks for checking this. I assume then that this patchset will get > merged through your tree. > > I think Rob's patchset depends on this, so ideally this should go first. > Otherwise the i915 driver would trigger the WARN in his patchset due to > the unheld event_lock. > Ok, but I merge it first, shouldn't Rob's patch set be rebased? Anyway this is minor issue so I could resolve it. And it seems like that your patch set has no dependency of Rob's. I mean that your patch set worked fine without Rob's. Thanks, Inki Dae > > --Imre > > > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/attachments/20121108/81493588/attachment.html>
