Ian Romanick wrote:
Michel Dnzer wrote:
Thanks again for your work on this Dave.
BTW, what's your (and everyone's, for that matter) opinion on
video-reset and the libsysfs copy being in the drm module? I still don't
see the point of the former being there, much less the latter.
I agree with
Keith Whitwell wrote:
Ian Romanick wrote:
I agree with Dave. libsysfs should get the axe, but video-reset can
stay or go. I do think that libdrm should get moved to the drm tree.
That will probably require move invasive changes to the build process,
though.
When you say libdrm, I think of
Michel Dnzer wrote:
Thanks again for your work on this Dave.
BTW, what's your (and everyone's, for that matter) opinion on
video-reset and the libsysfs copy being in the drm module? I still don't
see the point of the former being there, much less the latter.
I agree with Dave. libsysfs should
I'll whack libsysfs. That will make us vunerable to the volatility in that
library's interface; it hasn't been very stable over the last six months.
Video-reset statically links the libysysfs code to support early boot. It would
probably just be easier to ignore libsysfs and manipulate /sys
I've setup a temporary BK repo at http://freedesktop.org:1234/drm-2.6/
Yes, that works. Anything which you put into that bk tree will
automagically appear in my test kernels. When we're happy with it you can
ask Linus to merge it into the top-level tree.
Okay I've pushed all the first
I'd say let it be checked out in Andrews tree for a while and then I'll
ask Andrew to push it all onto Linus...
I'm finished mostly, all major difference between the DRM CVS and 2.6 are
in the bk tree http://freedesktop.org:1234/drm-2.6, I'll move it onto
bkbits when it arrives back on the
Thanks again for your work on this Dave.
BTW, what's your (and everyone's, for that matter) opinion on
video-reset and the libsysfs copy being in the drm module? I still don't
see the point of the former being there, much less the latter.
I think libsysfs should be killed out of the drm
Dave Airlie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a first attempt to bring the DRM in 2.6 in line with the latest
developments in DRM CVS, I'm going to try and split the latest DRM stuff
up into patches and submit them,
Thanks.
I've setup a temporary BK repo at http://freedesktop.org:1234/drm-2.6/
