On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:58:22AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 21:52:01 +0200 > Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> wrote: > > > So don't forget to restore them on resume and dump them into > > the error state. > > This should probably just be >= 6 instead; I don't think we're getting > rid of fences anytime soon.
As discussed on irc >= 6 is a bit hard to do in a switch statement ;-) Do you want me to resend the patches using the gcc ranged switch extension suggested by Adam Jackson (i.e. 6..UINT_MAX)? Or can you slap your r-b on them as-is? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: [email protected] Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
