On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:17:42PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:22:50PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > It will be only consistent once we've restored all the crtcs. Since a
> > bunch of other callers also want to just restore a single crtc, add a
> > boolean to disable checking only where it doesn't make sense.
> >
> > Note that intel_modeset_setup_hw_state already has a call to
> > intel_modeset_check_state at the end, so we don't reduce the amount of
> > checking.
> >
> > v2: Try harder not to create a big patch (Chris).
> >
> > v3: Even smaller (still Chris). Also fix a trailing space.
> >
> > References: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/16/60
> > Cc: Tomas Melin <tomas.me...@iki.fi>
> > Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcoch...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
>
> I'm happy that you are not touching any paths other than mentioned in
> the changelog, and that I think being quiet on the modeset is a good use
> of the 'force' semantics, so
>
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Queued for -next, thanks for the review.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
