Re: [PATCH 2/3] wined3d: store amount of video memory in gpu_description_table

[Roderick Colenbrander]

Hi Jesse,

I think the 465 change should go in after the gpu table patch. The gpu
table patch could be modified but then it would essentially contain
two patches (makes regression testing more complicated, though I doubt
that would be an issue here). It is trivial to submit a patch after
this is in. If you want I can do that.

Roderick

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Evil Jay <evil(a)eternaldusk.com> wrote:
>  Roderick,
>
> Would you add the GTX 465 (1GB) to this table?  That way the patch I
> submitted to add the 465 just 30 minutes earlier can be safely ignored.
>
> -Jesse

[PATCH 2/3] wined3d: store amount of video memory in gpu_description_table

[Evil Jay]

You're right, that does make more sense.

I'll keep an eye out for your patch to get merged and I'll submit an
addition for the 465 as a separate commit.

-Jesse


On 09/12/2010 02:29 PM, Roderick Colenbrander wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> I think the 465 change should go in after the gpu table patch. The gpu
> table patch could be modified but then it would essentially contain
> two patches (makes regression testing more complicated, though I doubt
> that would be an issue here). It is trivial to submit a patch after
> this is in. If you want I can do that.
>
> Roderick
>
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Evil Jay <evil(a)eternaldusk.com> wrote:
> > Roderick,
> >
> > Would you add the GTX 465 (1GB) to this table?  That way the patch I
> > submitted to add the 465 just 30 minutes earlier can be safely ignored.
> >
> > -Jesse