From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: clarify logging about reasons
	for disabling FBC
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:00:11 +0200
Message-ID: <87sj4spqs4.fsf@intel.com>
References: <20130214120810.GB2127@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
	<1361258300-2347-1-git-send-email-jani.nikula@intel.com>
	<20130219092019.GB4683@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320DFE61C2
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 19 Feb 2013 01:59:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20130219092019.GB4683@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 09:18:20AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> Previously FBC disabling due to per-chip default was logged as being
>> disabled per module parameter. Distinguish between the two.
>> 
>> v2: Don't even squawk in the debug log if FBC is explicitly disabled (Chris
>> Wilson).
>
> I'm still not entirely happy, as I still get to see the repeated message
> many time a second, but it is an improvement over the current message.

Right, I was just trying to get rid of printing misleading information
(disabled per module parameter when it was the per chip default) and
ignored the noise part (which can be more annoying).

Jani.