On 4/10/2014 7:34 PM, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 04:41:10PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014, Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 09:31:39AM +0530, S, Deepak wrote:
On 4/10/2014 1:30 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:42:42AM +0530, S, Deepak wrote:
On 4/9/2014 10:23 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 06:05:27PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 02:30:52PM +0000, S, Deepak wrote:
Hi Ville,
I am Ok with cleaning up and pushing the Code. Can you please tell me
when we need to start pushing the code and branch to use
(drm-intel-next)?
Well you can consider it pushed now that it's in the open. The patches
just need a bit of extra polish I think. Well, unless you're planning
a full blown rewrite of the code ;)
I guess you need to take into consideration whatever bdw rc6/rps patches
are still in flight, but since you've been doing some review there I
think you have a better idea than I do how things are progressing.
I always work on top of nightly, so I guess that's a good choice :)
Yes, -nightly is always the recommended branch to base upstream patches
on. I'll sort out the conflict mess (or well, try to) if it doesn't apply
to plain dinq or some other branch. drm-intel-next tends to be too
outdated ;-)
-Daniel
Hi Daniel/Ville.
Some of the patches are lined up for squashing right? So you want me
to work on this patches to align to upstream code and resubmit it to
same email thread?
Hm, I expect this chv thread to become a bit mess really quickly tbh ;-)
And since we don't have chv merged yet there's not really a baseline to do
this on top.
I guess the simplest approach would be for you to grab ville's chv tree,
squash in the patches as discussed and then just starting on polishing
your chv patches. Then as I pull in patches from this series you can drop
them from yours. A bit messy, but I don't see any other approach really.
Note that a pile of people are signed up to review this, so maybe hold off
a bit until the review for your patches have been done.
-Daniel
Thanks Daniel.
Ville can you please share your chv tree details?
I rebased the lot and pushed here:
git://gitorious.org/vsyrjala/linux.git chv_rebase
/me being lazy, did you squash/reorder patches, i.e. do the patch #
assignments [1] for review still apply?
The numbers would get shifted around a bit due to two these two patches
already getting merged:
drm/i915/chv: IS_BROADWELL() should not be true for Cherryview
drm/i915/chv: Add IS_CHERRYVIEW() macro
And this patch got dropped as it no longer applies:
drm/i915/chv: Add plane C support
Apart from that no reordering/squashing.
Jani.
[1] http://mid.gmane.org/20140410110857.GW18465@xxxxxxxxx
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Hi Ville,
Have you already squashed some of the RC6/turbo patches? Or you want me
to do it as part of RC6/RPS rework patches submission.
Thanks
Deepak
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
