Assuming patch 1 gets merged upstream, I think Andrew would normally send
off 2 and 3 to the XFS maintainers at that point (ie. when its prerequisites
are upstream) for you to merge.
On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 11:43:54AM +1000, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> Okay. When the time comes will you push the XF
Okay. When the time comes will you push the XFS changes to mainline
or would you like us to?
Nick Piggin wrote:
> Thanks for taking a look. I'll send them over to -mm with patch 1,
> then, for some testing.
>
> On Monday 04 August 2008 16:28, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
>> Looks good to me.
>>
>> Nic
> >
> > Then this, the thing is to keep it building you need compat code, code
> > that can't go into Linus tree, so we end up with a tree that isn't like
> > Linus tree, and we still have to patch manage transitions so we don't save
> > anything doing this over what we have now.
>
> I was thinki
> > As we discussed on IRC last night, I think these changes are perfectly
> > reasonable (in fact just what I'd expect if we moved to this model).
> > Sure, it will force contributors to be more disciplined, but that's
> > probably a good thing anyway. I'd still like to hear from the BSD guys
>
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Dave Airlie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > Personally, I only use the existing DRM repo on old kernels because that's
>> > how
>> > it's structured. It's actually more work for me to download & build a
>> > recent
>> > kernel, then update & build the DRM dri
Thanks for taking a look. I'll send them over to -mm with patch 1,
then, for some testing.
On Monday 04 August 2008 16:28, Lachlan McIlroy wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> Nick Piggin wrote:
> > Implement XFS's large buffer support with the new vmap APIs. See the vmap
> > rewrite patch for some numb
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16982
Summary: Problems with DRM on G33 chipset
Product: DRI
Version: DRI CVS
Platform: x86-64 (AMD64)
OS/Version: FreeBSD
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: medium
