On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 07:35, Keith Packard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 13:12:07 +0100, Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think that race is air-tight with your patch to rework the reset code
>> already. But better safe than sorry. And as I've said a good cleanup
>> anyway.
>
> Sounds good. I like clearer code, especially when it doesn't cost
> performance. I think I'd like my version in -fixes so that we don't
> change anything with -next; no reason to have two slightly different
> versions out there in case one (or the other) is broken?

Having the one-liner fix as separate patch makes backporting to 3.2
simpler. But I don't care much, so if you amend your commit to mention
the small fix hidden in the cleanup and add a note that the fix needs
to go to 3.2-stable that's fine by me, too.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
[email protected] - +41 (0) 79 364 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to