Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] gvt-next for 4.21

2018-12-11 Thread Jani Nikula
On Tue, 11 Dec 2018, Zhenyu Wang wrote: > On 2018.12.10 16:41:24 -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> >> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 12:36:59PM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > As I was hoping to possibly merge more new stuff for next kernel e.g >> > CFL support, etc, but seems those're s

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] gvt-next for 4.21

2018-12-10 Thread Zhenyu Wang
On 2018.12.10 16:41:24 -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 12:36:59PM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > As I was hoping to possibly merge more new stuff for next kernel e.g > > CFL support, etc, but seems those're still not stable enough so better > > wait for next

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PULL] gvt-next for 4.21

2018-12-10 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 12:36:59PM +0800, Zhenyu Wang wrote: > > Hi, > > As I was hoping to possibly merge more new stuff for next kernel e.g > CFL support, etc, but seems those're still not stable enough so better > wait for next cycle, so sorry for the late. If I understood correctly Jani alr

[Intel-gfx] [PULL] gvt-next for 4.21

2018-12-06 Thread Zhenyu Wang
Hi, As I was hoping to possibly merge more new stuff for next kernel e.g CFL support, etc, but seems those're still not stable enough so better wait for next cycle, so sorry for the late. This includes mostly one regression fix for drm-intel-next when we introduced during previous shadow ctx ppg