On Die, 2011-03-22 at 09:53 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dnzer wrote:
>
> >
> > In the post I referenced above, you said:
> >
> >> [...] I'll add a hook to the DDX to check the version and not issue
> >> the ioctl at all if it is requested on a higher
On Die, 2011-03-22 at 09:03 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dnzer wrote:
>
> > I'm still against this. At this point we know with certainty that
> > DRM_VBLANK_SECONDARY won't do what we want. In particular, if CRTC 1 is
> > disabled, the ioctl will time
[ xf86-video-ati patches usually go to the xorg-driver-ati at lists.x.org
list ]
On Fre, 2011-03-18 at 16:58 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>
> diff --git a/src/radeon_dri2.c b/src/radeon_dri2.c
> index 66df03c..ed27dad 100644
> --- a/src/radeon_dri2.c
> +++ b/src/radeon_dri2.c
> @@ -791,8 +792,16
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D?nzer wrote:
>
> Not calling the ioctl doesn't imply returning immediately.
>
> Your changes only fix the bug you found (the X radeon driver calls the
> ioctl when that doesn't make sense) when both the kernel and X driver
> are updated, but it would be
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D?nzer wrote:
>
> In the post I referenced above, you said:
>
>> [...] I'll add a hook to the DDX to check the version and not issue
>> the ioctl at all if it is requested on a higher CRTC. I think that's
>> better than falling back to the old style and
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D?nzer wrote:
> [ xf86-video-ati patches usually go to the xorg-driver-ati at lists.x.org
> list ]
>
I was told it should go to Alex and CC dri-devel. Next time I'll include
the other list.
>
> I'm still against this. At this point we know with
[ xf86-video-ati patches usually go to the xorg-driver-...@lists.x.org
list ]
On Fre, 2011-03-18 at 16:58 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
diff --git a/src/radeon_dri2.c b/src/radeon_dri2.c
index 66df03c..ed27dad 100644
--- a/src/radeon_dri2.c
+++ b/src/radeon_dri2.c
@@ -791,8 +792,16 @@ static
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D�nzer wrote:
[ xf86-video-ati patches usually go to the xorg-driver-...@lists.x.org
list ]
I was told it should go to Alex and CC dri-devel. Next time I'll include
the other list.
I'm still against this. At this point we know with certainty
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] D�nzer wrote:
In the post I referenced above, you said:
[...] I'll add a hook to the DDX to check the version and not issue
the ioctl at all if it is requested on a higher CRTC. I think that's
better than falling back to the old style and issuing
On Die, 2011-03-22 at 09:53 -0500, Ilija Hadzic wrote:
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dnzer wrote:
In the post I referenced above, you said:
[...] I'll add a hook to the DDX to check the version and not issue
the ioctl at all if it is requested on a higher CRTC. I think
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ilija Hadzic
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
>> support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
>> thus cannot be
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ilija Hadzic
ihad...@research.bell-labs.com wrote:
Hi Alex,
Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
thus cannot
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ilija Hadzic
wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
> support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
> thus cannot be represented using current primary/secondary flags interface).
>
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Ilija Hadzic
ihad...@research.bell-labs.com wrote:
Hi Alex,
Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
thus cannot be represented using current
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> The duplicated code in each function is begging to get pulled out into
> a separate function...
>
How about this then ?
diff --git a/src/radeon.h b/src/radeon.h
index a6d20d7..1a746c7 100644
--- a/src/radeon.h
+++ b/src/radeon.h
@@ -931,6 +931,9
Hi Alex,
Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
thus cannot be represented using current primary/secondary flags
interface). The patch makes use of GET_CAP ioctl to check whether
vblanks
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:58:39 -0500 (CDT)
Ilija Hadzic wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
> support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
> thus cannot be represented using current primary/secondary flags
Hi Alex,
Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
thus cannot be represented using current primary/secondary flags
interface). The patch makes use of GET_CAP ioctl to check whether
vblanks
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:58:39 -0500 (CDT)
Ilija Hadzic ihad...@research.bell-labs.com wrote:
Hi Alex,
Below is a patch against the master branch of xf86-video-ati that adds
support for waits on vblank events on CRTCs that are greater than 1 (and
thus cannot be represented using current
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Jesse Barnes wrote:
The duplicated code in each function is begging to get pulled out into
a separate function...
How about this then ?
diff --git a/src/radeon.h b/src/radeon.h
index a6d20d7..1a746c7 100644
--- a/src/radeon.h
+++ b/src/radeon.h
@@ -931,6 +931,9 @@
20 matches
Mail list logo
