Corbin Simpson schrieb:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:51 AM, K, Mythri P wrote:
>> Hi Jesse,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
>> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
>>> "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>>>
Hi Dave,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrot
hout changing the values nor interface nor behavior
>> of the kernel.
>
> No, one central point is not to leave two holes between
> _DRM_VBLANK_FLAGS_MASK, _DRM_VBLANK_HIGH_CRTC_MASK and
> _DRM_VBLANK_TYPES_MASK .
Okay I've pushed this to my tree before this discussion got
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> Like seriously you really think VFS locking rework wasn't under
>> development or discussion when you merged it? I'm sure Al would have
>> something to say about it considering the n
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, K, Mythri P wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
> > "K, Mythri P" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Dave,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:32 AM
From: John Lindgren
Fixes:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
agd5f: also add sanity check to connector records.
v2: fix one more case.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher
Cc: stable at kernel.org
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_atombios.c | 13 +++--
1 files changed, 7 i
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> Like seriously you really think VFS locking rework wasn't under
>> development or discussion when you merged it? I'm sure Al would have
>> something to say about it considering the n
Corbin Simpson schrieb:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:51 AM, K, Mythri P wrote:
Hi Jesse,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
"K, Mythri P" wrote:
Hi Dave,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:32 A
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> If this was a one-time event, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
> But the DRM tree is one of the BIGGEST issues after the merge window
> has closed. And it's EVERY SINGLE RELEASE.
.. regardless, it's pulled now. I just hope that some
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> If this was a one-time event, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
> But the DRM tree is one of the BIGGEST issues after the merge window
> has closed. And it's EVERY SINGLE RELEASE.
.. regardless, it's pulled now. I just hope that some
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> Like seriously you really think VFS locking rework wasn't under
> development or discussion when you merged it? I'm sure Al would have
> something to say about it considering the number of times he cursed in
> irc about that code after you me
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> Like seriously you really think VFS locking rework wasn't under
> development or discussion when you merged it? I'm sure Al would have
> something to say about it considering the number of times he cursed in
> irc about that code after you me
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> If you think this has anything to do with Intel's ability to break your
>> hardware
>> on every merge then you've got your wires crossed.
>
> No, it's about the fact that I expect t
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> If you think this has anything to do with Intel's ability to break your
> hardware
> on every merge then you've got your wires crossed.
No, it's about the fact that I expect to be pushed code that is
WRITTEN AND TESTED BEFORE THE MERGE WIND
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> If you think this has anything to do with Intel's ability to break your
> hardware
> on every merge then you've got your wires crossed.
No, it's about the fact that I expect to be pushed code that is
WRITTEN AND TESTED BEFORE THE MERGE WIND
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
--- Comment #8 from Alex Deucher 2011-03-24 16:29:17 PDT ---
Thanks, I've sent the updated version to Dave.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
--- Comment #8 from Alex Deucher 2011-03-24 16:29:17 PDT
---
Thanks, I've sent the updated version to Dave.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are
From: John Lindgren
Fixes:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
agd5f: also add sanity check to connector records.
v2: fix one more case.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher
Cc: sta...@kernel.org
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_atombios.c | 13 +++--
1 files changed, 7 inse
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
John Lindgren changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44725|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
John Lindgren changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44725|0 |1
is obsolete|
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
> Michel raised his concern after that point, so no matter what it was
> already in a tree I'd pushed out to public so the only answer when he
> raised his concern was to revert or fix it.
Just to be fair to Michel (and prevent any unnecessary "fights"
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, K, Mythri P wrote:
>
>> Hi Jesse,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
>> > "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Dave,
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Mar 23,
Hi Jesse,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
> "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Mythri P K wrote:
>> >> Adding support for common EDID parsi
Hi Alex,
Enclosed is a revised version of two patches sent on Mar 18 and Mar 22,
respectively. Details summarized in these two threads:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009463.html
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009582.html
This patch recon
Hi Alex,
Enclosed is a revised version of the patch sent on Mar 18, against
the master branch of the drm userspace (i.e. libdrm). Details
summarised in this thread:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009499.html
This patch reconciles libdrm with the the kernel change th
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
Michel raised his concern after that point, so no matter what it was
already in a tree I'd pushed out to public so the only answer when he
raised his concern was to revert or fix it.
Just to be fair to Michel (and prevent any unnecessary "fights" on t
From: John Lindgren
Fixes:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
agd5f: also add sanity check to connector records.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher
Cc: stable at kernel.org
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_atombios.c |6 --
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
d
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Ilija Hadzic
> wrote:
>>
>> OK, I'll update libdrm side to match this change and send the patch later
>> today
>
> Quite frankly, this whole discussion is a clear example of why DRM has
> been problematic.
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, K, Mythri P wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
> > "K, Mythri P" wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Dave,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:32 AM
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski
wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, K, Mythri P wrote:
>
>> Hi Jesse,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
>> > "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Dave,
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Mar 23,
> > When a page in the TTM pool is being moved back and forth and also changes
> > the caching model, what happens on the free part? Is the original caching
> > state put back on it? Say I allocated a DMA32 page (GFP_DMA32), and move it
> > to another pool for another radeon device. I also do some
On Don, 2011-03-24 at 21:06 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> 2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
> > On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 06:40 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> >> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> > 2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
> >> >> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 18:16 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >> >>> 201
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Ilija Hadzic
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>>
>> In other words: Why should I pull this at all?
>>
>
> You should pull it (eventually) because it fixes a problem that is real and
> visible and does it in a way that is conservative enough
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Ilija Hadzic
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>>
>> In other words: Why should I pull this at all?
>>
>
> You should pull it (eventually) because it fixes a problem that is real and
> visible and does it in a way that is conservative enough
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:51 AM, K, Mythri P wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
>> "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:3
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 2:51 AM, K, Mythri P wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
>> "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:3
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 08:52:20AM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> >On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> >>On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzesz
On Wednesday 23 March 2011 15:09:54 Robert Fekete wrote:
> On 21 March 2011 21:08, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 20:25, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:19:43 + timofonic timofonic wrote:
> S
Hi Linus,
this replaces the pull I sent yesterday that I don't see in your tree yet.
It should have the fix for your i915 in the intel patches, along with
a couple of radeon fixes, and the vblank change + fix.
Dave.
The following changes since commit c87a8d8dcd2587c203f3dd8a3c5c15d1e128ec0d:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> In other words: Why should I pull this at all?
>
You should pull it (eventually) because it fixes a problem that is real
and visible and does it in a way that is conservative enough to not risk
introducing new breakage.
Whether you should pull i
Hi Alex,
Enclosed is a revised version of two patches sent on Mar 18 and Mar 22,
respectively. Details summarized in these two threads:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009463.html
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009582.html
This patch recon
Hi Alex,
Enclosed is a revised version of the patch sent on Mar 18, against
the master branch of the drm userspace (i.e. libdrm). Details
summarised in this thread:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2011-March/009499.html
This patch reconciles libdrm with the the kernel change th
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 08:52:20AM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> >>On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >I was thinking about this a bit after I found
From: John Lindgren
Fixes:
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35502
agd5f: also add sanity check to connector records.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher
Cc: sta...@kernel.org
---
drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_atombios.c |6 --
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30227
--- Comment #9 from Michel Dänzer 2011-03-24 10:03:54 PDT
---
I'm not 100% sure (the radeon initialization output from dmesg could confirm),
but I suspect this is a duplicate of bug 28402.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/use
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30227
--- Comment #9 from Michel D?nzer 2011-03-24 10:03:54
PDT ---
I'm not 100% sure (the radeon initialization output from dmesg could confirm),
but I suspect this is a duplicate of bug 28402.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/use
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31782
Johannes Berg changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://johannes.sipsolution
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31782
Summary: nouveau: lockdep spew
Product: Drivers
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 2.6.38
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: norm
> > When a page in the TTM pool is being moved back and forth and also changes
> > the caching model, what happens on the free part? Is the original caching
> > state put back on it? Say I allocated a DMA32 page (GFP_DMA32), and move it
> > to another pool for another radeon device. I also do some
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 08:52:20AM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> >On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> >>On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzesz
On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>
>> On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>
> I was thinking about this a bit after I found that the PowerPC requires
> the 'struct dev'. But I
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
In other words: Why should I pull this at all?
You should pull it (eventually) because it fixes a problem that is real
and visible and does it in a way that is conservative enough to not risk
introducing new breakage.
Whether you should pull i
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Ilija Hadzic
wrote:
>
> OK, I'll update libdrm side to match this change and send the patch later
> today
Quite frankly, this whole discussion is a clear example of why DRM has
been problematic.
Why the hell am I getting pushed stuff that is clearly not baked? It
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Ilija Hadzic
wrote:
>
> OK, I'll update libdrm side to match this change and send the patch later
> today
Quite frankly, this whole discussion is a clear example of why DRM has
been problematic.
Why the hell am I getting pushed stuff that is clearly not baked? It
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 08:52:20AM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> >>On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >I was thinking about this a bit after I found
On Wednesday 23 March 2011 15:09:54 Robert Fekete wrote:
> On 21 March 2011 21:08, Alex Deucher wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 20:25, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:19:43 + timofonic timofonic wrote:
> S
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 02:53, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:44, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:48:20 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> Richard, any feedback on this?
>>
>> At KS akpm said he'd likely be taking over backlight from Richard,
>> since Richard is very
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:44, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:48:20 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Richard, any feedback on this?
>>
>
> At KS akpm said he'd likely be taking over backlight from Richard,
> since Richard is very distracted with other things atm (please correct
> me if
OK, I'll update libdrm side to match this change and send the patch later
today
-- Ilija
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
> 2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
>> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 06:40 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>>
2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27350
Jakob Bornecrantz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gallium makes mesa |[i915g] gallium makes mesa
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27350
Jakob Bornecrantz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|gallium makes mesa |[i915g] gallium makes mesa
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35622
Summary: [i915g] 6358e6371b31671acbfa7c00336673f62ee928c5
result in a black screen in the main menu of portal in
wine
Product: Mesa
Version: git
Platform: x86 (IA32
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35622
Summary: [i915g] 6358e6371b31671acbfa7c00336673f62ee928c5
result in a black screen in the main menu of portal in
wine
Product: Mesa
Version: git
Platform: x86 (IA32
Hi Linus,
this replaces the pull I sent yesterday that I don't see in your tree yet.
It should have the fix for your i915 in the intel patches, along with
a couple of radeon fixes, and the vblank change + fix.
Dave.
The following changes since commit c87a8d8dcd2587c203f3dd8a3c5c15d1e128ec0d:
OK, I'll update libdrm side to match this change and send the patch later
today
-- Ilija
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 06:40 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
2011/3/23 Michel D?nzer :
On Mit, 20
On Don, 2011-03-24 at 21:06 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> 2011/3/23 Michel Dänzer :
> > On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 06:40 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> >> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >>
> >> > 2011/3/23 Michel Dänzer :
> >> >> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 18:16 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
> >> >>> 201
2011/3/23 Michel Dänzer :
> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 06:40 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>
>> > 2011/3/23 Michel Dänzer :
>> >> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 18:16 +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> >>> 2011/3/23 Michel Dänzer :
>> On Mit, 2011-03-23 at 04:18 +, Dav
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 02:53, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:44, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:48:20 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> Richard, any feedback on this?
>>
>> At KS akpm said he'd likely be taking over backlight from Richard,
>> since Richard is very
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31782
Johannes Berg changed:
What|Removed |Added
URL||http://johannes.sipsolution
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 11:44, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:48:20 + Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Richard, any feedback on this?
>>
>
> At KS akpm said he'd likely be taking over backlight from Richard,
> since Richard is very distracted with other things atm (please correct
> me if
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31782
Summary: nouveau: lockdep spew
Product: Drivers
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 2.6.38
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: norm
Hi Jesse,
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:58:27 +0530
> "K, Mythri P" wrote:
>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Mythri P K wrote:
>> >> Adding support for common EDID parsin
On 03/23/2011 03:52 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 02:17:18PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 03/23/2011 01:51 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
I was thinking about this a bit after I found that the PowerPC requires
the 'struct dev'. But I got a question fi
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35578
Michel Dänzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35578
Michel D?nzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35578
Michel Dänzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44773|application/octet-stream|text/plain
mime type|
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35578
Michel D?nzer changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44773|application/octet-stream|text/plain
mime type|
76 matches
Mail list logo
