>
> The drm_locked_tasklet() function seems to have multiple bugs anyway,
> so getting rid of it can only help, and it avoids exporting a new
> tasklet_is_scheduled() interface.
That's exactly what I though when looking over this code. There's
some really crappy in code in that area, and it shou
On Sat, 2007-06-23 at 00:38 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > The two patches have two different objectives, even though they are
> > > related and currently on a 1 to 1 basis. The patches regardless,
> > > should stay separate.
> >
> > I'm not convi
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The two patches have two different objectives, even though they are
> > related and currently on a 1 to 1 basis. The patches regardless,
> > should stay separate.
>
> I'm not convinced yet .. One more stab?
uhm, i dont think Steve needs to 'convi
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 06:10:55PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 22 June 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > Index: linux-2.6.21-rt9/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c
> > > > ===
> > > > --- linux-2.6.21-rt9.orig/drivers/char/drm/d
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 18:10 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Wouldn't the easy solution be to get rid of drm_locked_tasklet
> entirely and convert i915_vblank_tasklet(), the only user, to use
> a work queue right away?
You recommend making the i915 use a workqueue to do this instead, and
remove the
On Friday 22 June 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Index: linux-2.6.21-rt9/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c
> > > ===
> > > --- linux-2.6.21-rt9.orig/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c
> > > +++ linux-2.6.21-rt9/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c
> > > @@
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 08:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:08 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > > > No sense in having a patch just for this, may as well merge this with
> > > > patch 3 ..
> > >
> > > Wrong. patch 3 adds the API and this one makes use of it. Stevens split
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:08 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > No sense in having a patch just for this, may as well merge this with
> > > patch 3 ..
> >
> > Wrong. patch 3 adds the API and this one makes use of it. Stevens split
> > makes perfectly sense.
>
> Clearly it doesn't make sense to me
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 08:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:36 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> > > Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API,
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 23:36 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> > Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API, which does not rely
> > on the tasklet implementation details.
> >
On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 00:00 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> plain text document attachment (tasklet-driver-hacks.patch)
> Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API, which does not rely
> on the tasklet implementation details.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> Inde
Update the DRM driver to use the new tasklet API, which does not rely
on the tasklet implementation details.
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.21-rt9/drivers/char/drm/drm_irq.c
===
--- linux-2.6.21-r
12 matches
Mail list logo
