Message ID | 50F7397B.8090003@nvidia.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Aaron Plattner <aplattner@nvidia.com> wrote:
> Can I consider this a Reviewed-by?
Essentially it was just a drive-by bikeshed ;-) I think it'd be good
if Maarten takes a look at this and checks whether it complies with
his massive prime/dma_buf rework to use fences and ticketing
reservations ...
-Daniel
Op 17-01-13 09:40, Daniel Vetter schreef: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Aaron Plattner <aplattner@nvidia.com> wrote: >> Can I consider this a Reviewed-by? > Essentially it was just a drive-by bikeshed ;-) I think it'd be good > if Maarten takes a look at this and checks whether it complies with > his massive prime/dma_buf rework to use fences and ticketing > reservations ... > -Daniel Looks ok to me, I just wish there was a unpin being called on dma-buf release or if dma_buf_export fails, instead of only implicitly during destruction. But that's something you couldn't have known, since it seems darktama still didn't accept my patch for that. :( ~Maarten
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_gem.c index 8bf695c..24e0aab 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_gem.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_gem.c @@ -24,8 +24,6 @@ * */ -#include <linux/dma-buf.h> Can I consider this a Reviewed-by? --