From owner-freebsd-x11@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 10 23:22:58 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 665AE1065670 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2782B8FC16 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:22:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywo32 with SMTP id 32so53638ywo.13 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:22:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=kx7ZSWHXPdB+tnte+ppGvvIh4sIytnUIn+lJzuAH4m4=; b=KmfwLNFXYj2AXKnQXGQ6aECXeKqGld4yvt+maS8P3i8678HkAGAyR9EDjnrdJVXutk SW798bpigLgjYq/yFSCVMemmI0+O1kHdqJRk5DVfA8zpB3rX426tfi+TxrY8K+6E8JVR BvnQIOf0sO2GgSRVXQg+a7tlUV8/3yb0c28zA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.180.3 with SMTP id i3mr9336800yhm.241.1313018577624; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:22:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.150.97.3 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:22:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110810123256.GN17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <20110810123256.GN17489@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 16:22:57 -0700 Message-ID: From: Kevin Oberman To: Kostik Belousov Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Intel GPU KMS + current X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 23:22:58 -0000 On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 5:32 AM, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:34:36PM +0300, m irya wrote: >> Hello everyone >> >> Looks like the Intel KMS patch (http://wiki.freebsd.org/Intel_GPU) is >> rejected after the recent pmap update in -current, any changes to get >> an updated patch? > I regenerated the patch after the merge, see 7.0. But, the patch contains > updates from the Linux 3.1 merge window, which I cannot test ATM. Is any of the currently available patches appropriate to Beta1? I have not looked at the rev number that was declared to be Beta1, but that was at least a line in the sand that would make it a good candidate for a patch set. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer - Retired E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com