Hi Timur, Christian, Thanks for the input, Timur.
To be clear, I'm not opposed to a backport. Fixing VCE1 for people stuck on the radeon driver with an LTS kernel is exactly the case that made me look into this in the first place. But my goal is only to help, and as I said before, I do not want to push a change you don't want. Christian, if you'd rather keep this out of stable, I'll drop the "Cc: stable" tag in v3 and leave the decision to you. If there is a specific concern behind it (risk of regressions on other SI/Trinity parts, say), I'd be glad to hear it. I can also try to address it, for example with more testing, so that a backport can be reconsidered later. On that note, the SI part was tested on real hardware together with patch 2, but the Trinity/Richland part only mirrors the existing CIK and SI handling and has not been tested on hardware. If anyone has a Trinity or Richland machine and can run a VCE encode with the series applied, a Tested-by would help for both the review and any backport discussion. Either way, I'll respin v3 with whatever you both prefer. Thanks, Matheus
