On 02/26/2017 10:51 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:47:23PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
>> On 02/24/2017 01:01 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> Hi Linus,
>>>
>>> This is the main drm pull request for v4.11.
>> Dave,
>>
>> I was sort of expecting the vmwgfx control node removal wo
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 08:47:23PM +0100, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
> On 02/24/2017 01:01 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> > Hi Linus,
> >
> > This is the main drm pull request for v4.11.
> Dave,
>
> I was sort of expecting the vmwgfx control node removal workaround to be
> in here. We're sort of blocked on
On 02/24/2017 01:01 AM, Dave Airlie wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> This is the main drm pull request for v4.11.
Dave,
I was sort of expecting the vmwgfx control node removal workaround to be
in here. We're sort of blocked on it.
Could we have it sent for rc1? Do you want me to resend the patch with
the rb
Hi Linus,
Yeah this went wrong. My experience with anything Kconfig (whether new
drivers or anything else) is that it takes 0day a few days to 1-2 weeks to
crunch through all the combos. I guess we could block new drivers pulls
like we already do with regular feature pulls in drm (e.g. drm-intel.g
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> AND WHY THE HELL WAS THIS UTTER SHITE SENT TO ME IF IT WAS COMMITTED
> YESTERDAY?
.. and a slightly less annoying piece of crap in this pull request:
that "PRIME_NUMBERS" config thing is utter garbage too.
Why would you ask a user about
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Dave Airlie wrote:
>
> This is the main drm pull request for v4.11.
>
> Nothing too major, the tinydrm and mmu-less support should make writing
> smaller drivers easier for some of the simpler platforms, and there are
> a bunch of documentation updates.
The tinydr
