On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 01:20:57AM -0800, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 02:26:12PM -0800, Volkin, Bradley D wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 02:13:21PM -0800, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 01:57:28PM -0800, bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > From: Brad Volkin <bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Brad Volkin <bradley.d.volkin@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > include/drm/i915_drm.h | 5 +++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/drm/i915_drm.h > > > > index 2f4eb8c..ba863c4 100644 > > > > --- a/include/drm/i915_drm.h > > > > +++ b/include/drm/i915_drm.h > > > > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ > > > > #ifndef _I915_DRM_H_ > > > > #define _I915_DRM_H_ > > > > > > > > -#include <drm.h> > > > > +#include <drm/drm.h> > > > > > > Something about this patch smells very fishy.... > > > > Yeah, I wasn't completely sure about this one. I followed what I thought was > > the procedure for updating the header (i.e. make headers_install in kernel, > > copy to libdrm) and this is what I got. > > I guess either works, so maybe just add a note to the commit message about > the little change. Imo it's better to have a 1:1 copy of the header > generated by the kernel. Sorry, I'm a bit confused. Did I follow the right procedure for updating the header? > -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
