>> But this patch is not about that - it is about how we signal/determine
>> that some change has to be written at commit stage.
>>As you remember when we were discussed offline, I just wanted to have
>> some expicit way to mark if some global state subsystem had changed,
>>without having to do
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 08:56:58AM +, Lisovskiy, Stanislav wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 18:12 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 04:57:33PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > > The reasoning behind this is such that current dependencies
> > > in the code are rather
On Thu, 2020-02-27 at 18:12 +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 04:57:33PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> > The reasoning behind this is such that current dependencies
> > in the code are rather implicit in a sense, we have to constantly
> > check a bunch of different bits
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 04:57:33PM +0200, Stanislav Lisovskiy wrote:
> The reasoning behind this is such that current dependencies
> in the code are rather implicit in a sense, we have to constantly
> check a bunch of different bits like state->modeset,
> state->active_pipe_changes, which
The reasoning behind this is such that current dependencies
in the code are rather implicit in a sense, we have to constantly
check a bunch of different bits like state->modeset,
state->active_pipe_changes, which sometimes can indicate counter
intuitive changes.
By introducing more fine grained
The reasoning behind this is such that current dependencies
in the code are rather implicit in a sense, we have to constantly
check a bunch of different bits like state->modeset,
state->active_pipe_changes, which sometimes can indicate counter
intuitive changes.
By introducing more fine grained
