[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-06-28 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, New -next pull request. Highlights: - Remaining vlv patches from Jesse et al. - Some hw workarounds from Jesse - hw context support from Ben - full uncore sharing on ivb - prep work to move the gtt code from intel-gtt.c to drm/i915 for gen6+ - some backlight code improvements - leftovers

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-05-10 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, New drm-intel-next pull request. Highlights: - sparse fixes from Ben. - tons of little cleanups from Chris all over: tiling_changed clarification, deferred_free list removal, ... - fix up irq handler on gen2 & gen3 + related cleanups from Chris - prep work for wait_rendering_timeout fro

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next manual merge

2012-05-07 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, As discussed on irc&mail, here's the pull request for the manual merge to unconfuse git about the changes in intel_display.c. Note that I've manually frobbed the shortlog to exclude all the changes merge through Linus' tree. Yours, Daniel The following changes since commit 5bc69bf9aeb73

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-02-23 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, New pull request for drm-intel-next, this time with a backmerge from -fixes to sort out a few things. Highlights: - interlaced support for i915. Again thanks a lot to all the ppl who help out with testing, patches and doc-crawling. - aliasing ppgtt support for snb/ivb. Because ppgtt pt

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-02-14 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, qa just reported on the latest drm-intel-next tree testing and found no regression. My own testing also hasn't revealed any surprises. The old tree had 3 outstanding issues: - this pull request contains a fix for the harmless but annoying i855gm dmesg splatter issue - an otherwise harml

[Intel-gfx] [pull] drm-intel-next-2012-01-20

2012-02-07 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, I've quickly looked at the qa report and one bug seems to be a benign warning due to one of Adam's paranoia patches. The other is a modeset failure because the kernel detects more modes (and the new ones fail). Could be either due to the CEA patch or one of the dp bandwidth patches. The o

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-01-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 16:24:08 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote: > I'd also like to express my frustration with the general -next process for > drm/i915: > - This drm-intel-next tree is less than 24h ours old (if you look at when > it showed up at an official place where both our QA and the community >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-01-05 Thread Ben Widawsky
On 01/05/2012 07:24 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:35:41PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote: Here are the rest of the 3.3 pending changes. This has a bunch of small bug fixes and overlay plane support for i915. The following changes since commit 7a7e8734ac3235efafd34819b27fbdf5

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-01-05 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:35:41PM -0800, Keith Packard wrote: > > Here are the rest of the 3.3 pending changes. > > This has a bunch of small bug fixes and overlay plane support for i915. > > The following changes since commit 7a7e8734ac3235efafd34819b27fbdf5417e6d60: > > Merge branch 'drm-r

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2012-01-04 Thread Keith Packard
Here are the rest of the 3.3 pending changes. This has a bunch of small bug fixes and overlay plane support for i915. The following changes since commit 7a7e8734ac3235efafd34819b27fbdf5417e6d60: Merge branch 'drm-radeon-testing' of ../drm-radeon-next into drm-core-next (2012-01-03 09:45:12 +

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-10-23 Thread Keith Packard
Here's a pile of new code for the 3.2 series. Overview: * 3 pipe support for IVB. * eDP fixes for SNB * Interrupt race condition fixes * Switch from MI_FLUSH to PIPECONTROL * VT-d work-around for ILK The following changes since commit 0ac225e56997ef89f46eb51b02799a685b78f214: Merge bran

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-09-19 Thread Keith Packard
This is a single patch which cleans up almost all of the whitespace errors in the i915 driver. It currently merges cleanly with your fdo drm-core-next tree. I've checked this patch quite carefully, examining the .o files with objdump -s to make sure nothing significant changed. The only thing tha

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-08-10 Thread Keith Packard
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 12:20:14 -0400, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Can you ack at least this one: > > >Revert and fix "drm/i915/dp: remove DPMS mode tracking from DP" > (i.e. d2b996ac698aebb28557355857927b8b934bb4f9) > > for -stable? It fixes an annoying regression in 3.0. I'm working on a

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-08-10 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On 08/03/2011 11:14 PM, Keith Packard wrote: Here's a pile of fixes on top of the stuff already in drm-core-next. * Pile of mode setting fixes which eliminate a selection of bugs and other annoyances. Eliminates the 'stripey' effect when going from two to one monitor, makes hot-plug w

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-08-03 Thread Keith Packard
Here's a pile of fixes on top of the stuff already in drm-core-next. * Pile of mode setting fixes which eliminate a selection of bugs and other annoyances. Eliminates the 'stripey' effect when going from two to one monitor, makes hot-plug work after suspend/resume, turns off the pipe/pl

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-07-13 Thread Keith Packard
Here's most of the patches I'm hoping to land after 3.0: * FBC cleanups from Chris Wilson. Fixes 'missing' CPU writes to the front buffer. We've enabled FBC by default, if we find regressions again, we'll turn it off before the release. * DP and HDMI support for formats other than 8bpc f

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] drm-intel-next

2011-07-13 Thread Keith Packard
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 19:22:14 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Is this one intentionally not in or did it slip through? I thought I had replied to that -- it doesn't apply to either -fixes or -next at this point. I can try to fix it, but I'd prefer it if you'd figure out how things have changed and r

<    1   2   3   4   5