On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:28:24AM +0530, sonika wrote:
>
> On Tuesday 24 February 2015 05:42 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:10:51AM +0530, Sonika Jindal wrote:
> >>Updating recommended DDI translation table for edp 1.4
> >>as per bspec update
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>Reviewed-by: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>---
> >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
> >>index 114b729..f17cc48 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ddi.c
> >>@@ -141,16 +141,16 @@ static const struct ddi_buf_trans skl_ddi_translations_dp[] = {
> >> /* eDP 1.4 low vswing translation parameters */
> >> static const struct ddi_buf_trans skl_ddi_translations_edp[] = {
> >I don't have an edp translation table at all for skl. Does this really
> >apply on -nightly? If not please make it clear in the cover letter what
> >your depencies are or just send everything in one patch series.
> >
> >Thanks, Daniel
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Yes my bad in missing that info. This patch is dependent on "drm/i915/skl:
> Add support for edp1.4 low vswing"
> which is merged on -internal. Do I need to send out those rebased patches
> for -nightly?
Yes, when submitting patches to the public mailing list please make sure
that they apply on the public drm-intel-nightly branch. If needed include
any other depencies in your series or rebase around missing bits that are
still embargoed.
Since the original patch is -internal too you probably can squash this
fixup into the patch with added the edp table originally.
Cheers, 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
