Op 17-10-16 om 08:05 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:04:03PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
>> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
>>> Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
remove
Op 17-10-16 om 08:05 schreef Daniel Vetter:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:04:03PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
>> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
>>> Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
remove
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:04:03PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> > Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> > >
> > > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> > > remove all of the redundant wm information.
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 05:04:03PM -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> > Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> > >
> > > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> > > remove all of the redundant wm information.
Your is SAGV related, and when we don't make the SAGV happy people's
machines usually hang. So I'm definitely for your patches getting
merged first
On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 17:07 -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 17:04 -0300, Paulo Zanoni escreveu:
> >
> > Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às
Your is SAGV related, and when we don't make the SAGV happy people's
machines usually hang. So I'm definitely for your patches getting
merged first
On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 17:07 -0300, Paulo Zanoni wrote:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 17:04 -0300, Paulo Zanoni escreveu:
> >
> > Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às
Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 17:04 -0300, Paulo Zanoni escreveu:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> >
> > Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> > >
> > >
> > > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we
> > > can
> > > remove all of the redundant wm
Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 17:04 -0300, Paulo Zanoni escreveu:
> Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> >
> > Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> > >
> > >
> > > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we
> > > can
> > > remove all of the redundant wm
Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> >
> > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> > remove all of the redundant wm information. Up until now we'd been
> > storing two copies of all of the skl
Em Qui, 2016-10-13 às 15:39 +0200, Maarten Lankhorst escreveu:
> Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> >
> > Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> > remove all of the redundant wm information. Up until now we'd been
> > storing two copies of all of the skl
Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> remove all of the redundant wm information. Up until now we'd been
> storing two copies of all of the skl watermarks: one being the
> skl_pipe_wm structs, the other being the global wm struct
Op 08-10-16 om 02:11 schreef Lyude:
> Now that we've make skl_wm_levels make a little more sense, we can
> remove all of the redundant wm information. Up until now we'd been
> storing two copies of all of the skl watermarks: one being the
> skl_pipe_wm structs, the other being the global wm struct
12 matches
Mail list logo