On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 19:53:33 -0300, Eugeni Dodonov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/24/2012 03:51 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Well, only for gen6+, and now with Dave's suggestion implemented to tell drm > > core that we don't need agp. It's ugly and I really prefer if we'd kill the > > drm > > agp midlayer stuff instead. But this way we can go forward with moving > > gen6+ gtt > > stuff to drm/i915 and implementing some neat new cool things. > > > > As usual, flames&bikesheds highly welcome. > > I cannot think on a less invasive way to do so, so, for the series: > Reviewed-by: Eugeni Dodonov <[email protected]> > > With just one tiny bikeshed on patch2.
Agreed, except that it is not just bikeshedding on patch too. Without any hint as to why gen3 is special, both in the changelog and justifying the code as a comment (remember the comments are to explain why!), the patch is NAKed. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
