On Wed, 2012-03-14 at 10:06 -0500, Rob Clark wrote: > > Well, as I said, it's not an issue for me and from my side it can be > > improved later. > > yeah, when CMA is actually merged, there are a few other things I'd > like to do to, incl converting omapfb over to use CMA and remove > omap_vram.. but I guess those will be other patches. Right, I just realized CMA is not in the kernel, nor does it seem to be in the linux-next. Is there a reason why you want it already merged? Wouldn't it be easier to get it in only when it can actually be used. Especially if there's room for improvement. Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
