On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 03:33:24PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 01/25/2012 03:31 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 01:58:47PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> >> On 01/24/2012 11:17 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> >>> Revusion. Fail. null
> >>>
> >>>
> >> To clarify for posterity. I me
On 01/25/2012 03:31 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 01:58:47PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>> On 01/24/2012 11:17 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>>> Revusion. Fail. null
>>>
>>>
>> To clarify for posterity. I meant, I typo'd the subject of the
>> cover-letter. The patches themselves sho
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 01:58:47PM -0800, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 01/24/2012 11:17 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > Revusion. Fail. null
> >
> >
> To clarify for posterity. I meant, I typo'd the subject of the
> cover-letter. The patches themselves should be good to merge.
I think we'll still see a
On 01/24/2012 11:17 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> Revusion. Fail. null
>
>
To clarify for posterity. I meant, I typo'd the subject of the
cover-letter. The patches themselves should be good to merge.
Ben
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesk
Revusion. Fail. null___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
I decided to remove the history of the patches since I expect this
version to go upstream. The cover-letter serves to remind us all that
this is the final version of the patches, without the clutter in the
commit messages.
Ben Widawsky (2):
drm/i915: argument to control retiring behavior
drm/i
