On Tue, 01 Aug 2017 21:25:11 +0200, Mathieu Larouche wrote: > > On 18/07/2017 10:43 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > Hi, > > > > this is a summer cleanup sale, a patchset containing various fixes for > > mgag200 driver taken from openSUSE / SUSE kernels. They have been in > > our kernels for ages, so at least they are supposed to be stable. > > > > Most of patches came from Egbert, and one PM patch from me that is a > > resubmission of the once-post-and-lost patch. > > > > > > thanks, > > > > Takashi > > > > === > > > > Egbert Eich (13): > > drm/mgag200: Add doublescan and interlace support > > drm/mgag200: Add additional limits for certain G200 variants > > drm/mgag200: Fix memleak in error path in mgag200_bo_create() > > drm/mgag200: Free container instead of member in > > mga_user_framebuffer_destroy() > > drm/mgag200: Initialize data needed to map fbdev memory > > drm/mgag200: Simplify function mgag200_ttm_placement() > > drm/mgag200: Add support for MATROX PCI device IDs 0x520 and 0x521 > > drm/mgag200: Cleanup cursor BOs properly > > drm/mgag200: Add missing drm_connector_unregister() > > drm/mgag200: Don't use crtc_* parameters for validation > > drm/mgag200: Consolidate depth/bpp handling > > drm/mgag200: Add command line option to specify preferred depth > > drm/mgag200: Add mode validation debugging code > > > > Takashi Iwai (1): > > drm/mgag200: Implement basic PM support > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c | 54 +++++++++++ > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.h | 22 +++-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_fb.c | 14 +-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_main.c | 146 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_mode.c | 166 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > > drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_ttm.c | 11 ++- > > 6 files changed, 357 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) > > > > Patches were tested against G200eW3, G200e4 & G200eH3 and it's working > fine and we haven't seen any issues.
Thanks for testing! > There's one thing though, the patch "[PATCH 01/14] drm/mgag200: Add > doublescan and interlace support" may cause problems as doublescan and > interlace aren't tested and aren't officially supported on the G200 > server line products. So, I'm wondering if it shouldn't be kept > disabled for them. OK, that's good to know. My understanding is that the patch was brought only for adapting the UMS X driver quality, but not for actually fixing the real bugs. Let's drop that patch, then. Takashi _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
