On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:43:57PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
> duplicate
> the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
> touched.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst
Op 01-02-16 om 17:08 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:43:57PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
>> duplicate
>> the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
>> touched.
>>
>>
Op 01-02-16 om 18:09 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:43:57PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
>> duplicate
>> the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
>> touched.
>>
>>
Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
duplicate
the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
touched.
Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 128
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:43:57PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
> duplicate
> the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
> touched.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:43:57PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> Instead of restoring dpms and a flag for whether a temp fb is allocated
> duplicate
> the old plane_state and crtc_state, and restore the members we potentially
> touched.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst