On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:08:34PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 06:01:03PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 02:46:52PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> > >> Hi Chris, >> > >> >> > >> could you please review this specific one or give you ack here? >> > > >> > > Didn't see anything wrong with it. The only caveat I have is that the >> > > GETPARAM must be accurate immediately following a setcrtc. >> > >> > To be truly honest I have no idea, mainly when we alternate with fbcon >> > updating psr state at set_base. >> > Could you please also review subsequent patches in this series... 10 and 11. >> > I think 11 answer this question... >> >> If it is not clear by this point, and the changelog doesn't make it >> clear, then something is missing from this patch. Hint ;-) > > I'll punt on userspace interface changes, at least until we've figured out > a clear picture how to do this. agreed > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- Rodrigo Vivi Blog: http://blog.vivi.eng.br _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
