Re: [PATCH][next] drm: Replace zero-length array with flexible-array member

Quoting Gustavo A. R. Silva (2020-02-25 14:03:47) > The current codebase makes use of the zero-length array language > extension to the C90 standard, but the preferred mechanism to declare > variable-length types such as these ones is a flexible array member[1][2], > introduced in C99: I remember

Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] drm: plumb attaching dev thru to prime_pin/unpin

Quoting Rob Clark (2019-07-16 18:43:22) > From: Rob Clark > > Needed in the following patch for cache operations. What's the base for this patch? (I'm missing the ancestor for drm_gem.c) -Chris ___ Virtualization mailing list

Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] remove_conflicting_framebuffers() cleanup

Quoting Daniel Vetter (2018-08-31 10:04:39) > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:00:01PM +0200, Michał Mirosław wrote: > > This series cleans up duplicated code for replacing firmware FB > > driver with proper DRI driver and adds handover support to > > Tegra driver. > > > > This is a sligtly updated

Re: [patch net-next 0/3] net/sched: Improve getting objects by indexes

Quoting Christian König (2017-08-16 08:49:07) > Am 16.08.2017 um 04:12 schrieb Chris Mi: > > Using current TC code, it is very slow to insert a lot of rules. > > > > In order to improve the rules update rate in TC, > > we introduced the following two changes: > > 1) changed cls_flower to

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/20] drm/atomic: Fix remaining places where !funcs->best_encoder is valid

most of them into simple lookups. For the idr_find, I'm tempted to replace the mutex with a rwlock. It helps pathological cases, but in reality there are more crucial locks around the hw that limit concurrency. ;-) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Techn