[Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

2016-10-21 Thread Zhenyu Wang
On 2016.10.20 21:25:03 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap > > wrote: > >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Changes since 20161019: > >>> > >> > >> on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI

[Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

2016-10-20 Thread Jani Nikula
On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap > wrote: >> On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20161019: >>> >> >> on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: > > Adding Zhenyu. Might be good to have a fix just

[Intel-gfx] linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

2016-10-20 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Changes since 20161019: >> > > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: Adding Zhenyu. Might be good to have a fix just for this that I directly pick up, since I want to tag the

linux-next: Tree for Oct 20 (gpu/drm/i915)

2016-10-20 Thread Randy Dunlap
On 10/19/16 20:20, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since 20161019: > on i386: when CONFIG_ACPI is not enabled: ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c: In function 'intel_gvt_init_opregion': ../drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c:183:2: error: implicit declaration of function