On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 08:59:56PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 09:35:17AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Most platforms din't hit this condition, but if we want to allow > > building without agp we should also make this allowed on gen3. > > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > > index 38a344694e35..d7c922051c89 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.c > > @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static struct drm_driver driver; > > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_AGP_INTEL) > > extern int intel_agp_enabled; > > #else > > -static int intel_agp_enabled; > > +static int intel_agp_enabled = 1; > > Patch 2/3 eliminates our only use of intel_agp_enabled, so this patch > seems pointless. Patch 2 has a good chance to get reverted, so having this separate isn't completely pointless. Should have mentioned this in the cover letter ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
