On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:51 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 05:32:55PM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:15 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:20:59AM +0800, yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
Limit the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE posix timer
On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 00:16 +0800, Keith Packard wrote:
On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:39:52 +0800, ykzhao yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:36:05 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] EDID: fix the incorrect mode definition for VIC61 in
CEA
This patch has been corrupted with the lines
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:51 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 05:32:55PM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:15 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:20:59AM +0800, yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
Limit the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE posix timer
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 19:53 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 05:32:55PM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:15 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
Your patch, however, removes the check to make sure the monotonic clock
is working.
No. The CLOCK_MONOTONIC check
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 18:51 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 05:32:55PM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:15 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:20:59AM +0800, yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
Limit the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE posix timer
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:15 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 09:20:59AM +0800, yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
Limit the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE posix timer to linux platform. This is
to avoid the issue that OS doesn't support CLOCK_MONOTINC_COARSE posix timer
while the
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 10:21 +0800, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 09:20 +0800, Zhao Yakui wrote:
diff --git a/os/utils.c b/os/utils.c
index 51455cc..a37a99d 100644
--- a/os/utils.c
+++ b/os/utils.c
@@ -427,7 +427,17 @@ GetTimeInMillis(void)
#ifdef MONOTONIC_CLOCK
On Thu, 2010-08-26 at 17:55 +0800, Pauli Nieminen wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:48 AM, ykzhao yakui.z...@intel.com wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 17:02 +0800, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 16:45:34 24.08.2010 UTC+08 when yakui.z...@intel.com did
gyre and gimble:
y What side
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 18:59 +0800, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 16:15:44 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
I also agree that it is very pretty to get the time by using mentioned
order. But the configure script already helps us to test whether the
MONOTONIC_CLOCK is supported(It uses
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 17:02 +0800, Mikhail Gusarov wrote:
Twas brillig at 16:45:34 24.08.2010 UTC+08 when yakui.z...@intel.com did gyre
and gimble:
y What side effect will it bring if we define it explicitly and use it
y when it is not defined in system header?
Bad side-effect is X.org
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 09:59 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:32:48AM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:25 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 10:23 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
diff --git a/os/utils.c b/os/utils.c
index 51455cc..a08d591
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 12:46 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:05:23AM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
Maybe there is no definition of CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE
in /usr/include/bits/time.h when compiling the xorg. But the xorg is
executed on the linux kernel that supports
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 16:13 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 03:55:41PM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 09:59 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
That doesn't change anything - if a system is using ID 6 for something
else, then using 6 is wholly incorrect, no matter
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:25 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 10:23 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
From: yakui.z...@intel.com
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:20:05 +0800
From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
---
os/utils.c | 14 +-
1 files changed, 13
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 08:32 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:25 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 10:23 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
From: yakui.z...@intel.com
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:20:05 +0800
From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
---
os
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 08:42 +0800, Samuel Thibault wrote:
ykzhao, le Tue 24 Aug 2010 08:32:48 +0800, a écrit :
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 23:25 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2010-08-23 at 10:23 +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
From: yakui.z...@intel.com
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:20:05
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 09:16 +0800, Samuel Thibault wrote:
ykzhao, le Tue 24 Aug 2010 09:07:49 +0800, a écrit :
+static clockid_t clockid;
+if (!clockid) {
+#ifdef __linux__
+#ifndef CLOCK_MONONOTIC_COARSE
+#define CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE
If you don't provide the value 6 here
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 10:12 +0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 08:55:22AM +0800, ykzhao wrote:
What Mark mentioned is that the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE posix timer is
not supported while the corresponding ID is used for other posix timer.
Right?
6 has no meaning
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 23:30 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 13:08 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 11:32 +0800, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 09:47:23 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
when playing flash h.264 cif video workload, the cpu C0 usage
On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 22:47 +0800, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 09:47 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
We tried one debug patch that uses the CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE timer
instead of CLOCK_MONOTONIC in xserver/os/utils.c.
It sure would be nice if CLOCK_MONOTONIC_COARSE were documented
On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 11:32 +0800, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 09:47:23 +0800, ykzhao wrote:
when playing flash h.264 cif video workload, the cpu C0 usage is reduced
from 43% to 42% while the video quality is not affected.
Is 43% vs 42% a really significant win? How
Hi, All
I meet with an issue about posix timer in course of testing media
workload on one machine. On this machine the HPET clock source is
selected as TSC stops in course of entering the deep C-state.
The issue is that the function of read_hpet will be called more
than 2 every
On Wed, 2009-11-18 at 18:04 +0800, Zhao, Yakui wrote:
From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
Move the EDID quirk for Philips LCD LP154W01 as the panel reports the vertical
size in cm.
Hi, Keith/Ajax
How about this patch?
The incorrect quirk is applied to Philips LCD(154W01), which causes
On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 09:34 +0800, Zhao, Yakui wrote:
From: Zhao Yakui yakui.z...@intel.com
Move the EDID quirk for Philips LCD LP154W01 as the panel reports the vertical
size in cm.
Hi, Ajax
The EDID in several Philips LCD monitor reports the panel vertical
size in cm, which causes that
24 matches
Mail list logo
