Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

Hi Daniel, On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 16:00:36 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:33:57PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 12:03:55 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:13:46PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > > On

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:33:57PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 12:03:55 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:13:46PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 22:30:53 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > > >> + * Drivers are

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

Hi Daniel, On Tuesday, 19 December 2017 12:03:55 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:13:46PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 22:30:53 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > >> state, but

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 06:13:46PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Thank you for the patch. > > On Thursday, 14 December 2017 22:30:53 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > > DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > > state, but in the git history alone it'll be

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

Hi Daniel, Thank you for the patch. On Thursday, 14 December 2017 22:30:53 EET Daniel Vetter wrote: > DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > state, but in the git history alone it'll be lost. You might want to spell DK's name fully. > Also, since Ville remove the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

Hi Alex, On Friday, 15 December 2017 03:57:48 EET Alex Deucher wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > > state, but in the git history alone it'll be lost. > > > > Also, since Ville remove the void*

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

On Thu, 2017-12-14 at 21:30 +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > state, but in the git history alone it'll be lost. > > Also, since Ville remove the void* usage it's a good opportunity to > give the driver private stuff some tlc on the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private > state, but in the git history alone it'll be lost. > > Also, since Ville remove the void* usage it's a good opportunity to > give the driver private

[PATCH 4/5] drm/atomic: document how to handle driver private objects

DK put some nice docs into the commit introducing driver private state, but in the git history alone it'll be lost. Also, since Ville remove the void* usage it's a good opportunity to give the driver private stuff some tlc on the doc front. Finally try to explain why the "let's just subclass