Op 13-07-15 om 19:16 schreef Daniel Stone: > Hi, > > On 13 July 2015 at 15:30, Maarten Lankhorst > <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> @@ -13649,9 +13647,7 @@ static void intel_begin_crtc_commit(struct drm_crtc *crtc) >> >> /* Perform vblank evasion around commit operation */ >> if (crtc->state->active) >> - intel_crtc->atomic.evade = >> - intel_pipe_update_start(intel_crtc, >> - &intel_crtc->atomic.start_vbl_count); >> + intel_pipe_update_start(intel_crtc, &intel_crtc->atomic.start_vbl_count); >> >> if (!needs_modeset(crtc->state) && INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9) >> skl_detach_scalers(intel_crtc); >> @@ -13663,9 +13659,8 @@ static void intel_finish_crtc_commit(struct drm_crtc *crtc) >> struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; >> struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc); >> >> - if (intel_crtc->atomic.evade) >> - intel_pipe_update_end(intel_crtc, >> - intel_crtc->atomic.start_vbl_count); > Can we get rid of the 'evade' member in the struct now? > > Cheers, > Daniel Yeah, it's useless now. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
