On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >> If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those
> >> particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers.
> >
> > Ray, I'd agree with you if the
> Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup
> obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do,
> and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project.
You seem confused. If you have a support contract of some form with a
Linux supplier or
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Keith,
first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Keith,
first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Keith,
first of all thanks
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:02:59PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is
it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no
interest/will to analyze now obviously buggy/duplicate code and fix it?
Because they
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:56:01AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is
it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no
interest/will to analyze now
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those
particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers.
Ray, I'd agree with you if the topic was about cleanups.
At this point it is about cleanups
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those
particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers.
Ray, I'd agree with you if the
Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup
obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do,
and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project.
You seem confused. If you have a support contract of some form with a
Linux supplier or
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:41:44AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup
obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do,
and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project.
You seem confused. If you
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:56:01AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is
> > it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no
> > interest/will to analyze now
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:02:59PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > > Keith,
> > > >
> > > >
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote:
> > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at
On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > Keith,
> > >
> > > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 22,
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > Keith,
> >
> > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>> If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those
>> particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers.
>
> Ray, I'd agree with you if the topic was about cleanups.
At this point it is about cleanups unless
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is
> it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no
> interest/will to analyze now obviously buggy/duplicate code and fix it?
Because they don't have an
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
Keith,
first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
And now after v3.0 is
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> Keith,
>
> first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then...
>
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov
> > wrote:
> >
> > > And now after v3.0 is
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
You're right, of course --
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
> >
> >> > You're right, of course -- UMS
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
>
>> > You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at
>> > this point, keeping it
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at
this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality
continues to cause
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov k...@mns.spb.ru wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at
this point, keeping it
32 matches
Mail list logo
