On Wed, January 12, 2011 13:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> Sure, s/intel_panel_get_max_backlight/intel_panel_get_backlight/ and we
> get the behaviour we both want - preserving the current backlight unless
> none is set.
Indeed, I hadn't noticed that shortcut. That's a lot nicer than my ifdefery.
>
On Wed, January 12, 2011 13:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> Sure, s/intel_panel_get_max_backlight/intel_panel_get_backlight/ and we
> get the behaviour we both want - preserving the current backlight unless
> none is set.
Indeed, I hadn't noticed that shortcut. That's a lot nicer than my ifdefery.
>
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:07:23 +, Chris Wilson
wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pan
> index e00d200..27c79c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> @@ -278,6 +278,6 @@ void intel_panel
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:35:49 +0100 (CET), "Indan Zupancic"
wrote:
> Yeah, the second patch is a bit of a desperate attempt because Larry reported
> that
> it didn't fix his problem.
>
> About your patch, you still do:
>
> +void intel_panel_setup_backlight(struct drm_device *dev)
> +{
> + s
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:07:23 +, Chris Wilson
wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pan
> index e00d200..27c79c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_panel.c
> @@ -278,6 +278,6 @@ void intel_panel
On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 01:35:49 +0100 (CET), "Indan Zupancic" wrote:
> Yeah, the second patch is a bit of a desperate attempt because Larry reported
> that
> it didn't fix his problem.
>
> About your patch, you still do:
>
> +void intel_panel_setup_backlight(struct drm_device *dev)
> +{
> + st
Hello,
On Tue, January 11, 2011 18:39, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>>
>> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > [..
On Tue 11-01-11 18:37:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 11-01-11 18:17:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
> >
> > On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > We di
On Tue 11-01-11 17:39:42, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
> >
> > On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > [...]
>
On Tue 11-01-11 18:17:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>
> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
>
[Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is st
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>
> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank
Hello,
On Tue, January 11, 2011 18:39, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>>
>> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> > [..
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 14:33, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> I can reproduce the problem easily by:
>> xset dpms force standby; sleep 3s; xset dpms force on
>
> (You are using "vesa" or "fbcon" X11 driver, right? I seen same problem
> until I switched to "intel" X11 driver).
No, the "intel".
On Tue 11-01-11 14:33:20, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > > regression on intel graphics.
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/s
On Tue 11-01-11 18:37:41, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 11-01-11 18:17:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
> >
> > On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > We di
On Tue 11-01-11 17:39:42, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
> >
> > On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > [...]
>
On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 18:19:17 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>
> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank
On Tue 11-01-11 18:17:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
>
> On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
>
[Let's CC Indan - author of the bugzilla patches]
On Thu 06-01-11 11:48:16, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is st
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 14:33, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> I can reproduce the problem easily by:
>> xset dpms force standby; sleep 3s; xset dpms force on
>
> (You are using "vesa" or "fbcon" X11 driver, right? I seen same problem
> until I switched to "intel" X11 driver).
No, the "intel".
___
On Tue 11-01-11 14:33:20, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > > regression on intel graphics.
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/s
On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 11:50:02 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
On Thu 06-01-11 22:08:46, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 21:55, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> >> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the
On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 11:50:02 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> [...]
> > We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> > regression on intel graphics.
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
On Thu 06-01-11 22:08:46, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 21:55, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> >> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timi
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 21:55, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson
> wrote:
>>
>> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
>> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
>> turning on the panel and adjusting the
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
> turning on the panel and adjusting the backlight which would be restore
> with:
>
> diff --git a/
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:55:23 +0100, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson
> wrote:
> >
> > My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> > and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
> > turning on the panel and adju
Just for reference, my initial report was:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/23/146
On Thu 06-01-11 08:29:22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> > backlight. One report is https://bugz
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:29:22 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> > backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22672.
> > I can reproduce the problem
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 21:55, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>
>> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
>> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
>> turning on the panel and adjusting the ba
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 21:55:23 +0100, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >
> > My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> > and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
> > turning on the panel and adjusti
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 18:49, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> My fear is that some machines have a dependency between the backlight
> and panel power status. The patch in question changed the timing between
> turning on the panel and adjusting the backlight which would be restore
> with:
>
> diff --git a/
Hi,
On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[...]
> We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> regression on intel graphics.
It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=226
On Thu, 6 Jan 2011 08:29:22 -0800, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> > backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22672.
> > I can reproduce the problem
Just for reference, my initial report was:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/23/146
On Thu 06-01-11 08:29:22, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> > backlight. One report is https://bugz
Hi,
On Tue 04-01-11 17:15:45, Linus Torvalds wrote:
[...]
> We did have another revert to fix hopefullythe last "blank screen"
> regression on intel graphics.
It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=226
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22672.
> I can reproduce the problem easily by:
> xset dpms force standby; sleep 3s; xset dpms force on
>
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:48 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> It seems that there is still a regression for intel graphic cards
> backlight. One report is https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22672.
> I can reproduce the problem easily by:
> xset dpms force standby; sleep 3s; xset dpms force on
>
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:18:12PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Another week, another -rc. This should be the last for the 37 series,
> so I still expect the merge window to open early January when people
> are hopefully back to working order after having eaten (and drunk) too
> much.
>
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:18:12PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Another week, another -rc. This should be the last for the 37 series,
> so I still expect the merge window to open early January when people
> are hopefully back to working order after having eaten (and drunk) too
> much.
>
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:49:33 +0800 (SGT), Jeff Chua wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>
> > Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
> > minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
>
> Jesse,
>
> Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the pa
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> wrote:
> >
> > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > is this:
>
> Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
> 92971021c6328
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:49:33 +0800 (SGT), Jeff Chua
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>
> > Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
> > minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
>
> Jesse,
>
> Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the p
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
wrote:
> Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
> minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
Jesse,
Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the patch a bit below.
Thanks,
Jeff
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c 2010-12
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> wrote:
> >
> > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > is this:
>
> Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
> 92971021c6328
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:49:33 +0800 (SGT)
Jeff Chua wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>
> > Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
> > minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
>
> Jesse,
>
> Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the pa
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:49:33 +0800 (SGT)
Jeff Chua wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>
> > Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
> > minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
>
> Jesse,
>
> Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the pa
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 01:02, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> That's the easiest way; I think there are existing packages available
> as well, but you may have to check Karmic or newer.
Never mind. I'm lazy (that's not to say someone is too).
I redid the test:
Before running "xset dpms force standby":
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:20, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
>>>
>>> ? http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu_dump-after-lid
>>
>> I need the intel_reg_dumper output, not intel_
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
>>
>> ? http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu_dump-after-lid
>
> I need the intel_reg_dumper output, not intel_gpu_dump. :)
>
Hmm, there is no intel_reg_dumper in intel-gp
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:53, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>>
>> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
>> to panel power or backlight control. ?Have you tried bisecting for the
>> problem between 2.6.35 and 2.6.36?
>
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:18, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? if (IS_GEN5(dev) || IS_GEN6(dev))
>> > + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? dev_priv->lvds_use_ssc = 0;
>>
>> Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>
> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
>
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Jesse Barnes
wrote:
Randy, Jeff and Alex, does the below help at all? If so, it may be the
minimal fix we want for 2.6.37.
Jesse,
Yes, that worked for me. I improved on the patch a bit below.
Thanks,
Jeff
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c 2010-12
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 21:16, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> Chris - why did that lvds_ssc_freq thing suddenly start mattering? Can
>> we please just disable spread-spectrum entirely? Or perhaps only if we
>> notice that it was enabled already
Le 29/12/10 21:16, Jesse Barnes a ?crit :
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
>>> is this:
>>
>> Hmm. I suspect that difference
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 01:02, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> That's the easiest way; I think there are existing packages available
> as well, but you may have to check Karmic or newer.
Never mind. I'm lazy (that's not to say someone is too).
I redid the test:
Before running "xset dpms force standby":
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:35:15 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:20, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes
> > wrote:
> >>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
> >>>
> >>> http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:35:15 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:20, Alex Riesen wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes
> > wrote:
> >>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
> >>>
> >>> ? http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:46:14 -0800 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios
> > > index 2b20786..d27d016 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > @@ -263,6 +263,
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 14:46:14 -0800 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios
> > > index 2b20786..d27d016 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > > @@ -263,6 +263,
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:20, Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
>>>
>>> http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu_dump-after-lid
>>
>> I need the intel_reg_dumper output, not intel_gpu
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 00:13, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> After closing and opening the lid (displays backlight is back)
>>
>> http://vin-soft.org/~raa/public/test/intel_gpu_dump-after-lid
>
> I need the intel_reg_dumper output, not intel_gpu_dump. :)
>
Hmm, there is no intel_reg_dumper in intel-gp
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:09:56 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:53, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
> >>
> >> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
> >> to panel power or backlight control. Have y
On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 00:09:56 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:53, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
> >> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
> >>
> >> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
> >> to panel power or backlight control. ?Hav
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:53, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>>
>> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
>> to panel power or backlight control. Have you tried bisecting for the
>> problem between 2.6.35 and 2.6.36?
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios
> > index 2b20786..d27d016 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > @@ -263,6 +263,9 @@ parse_general_features(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv,
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios
> > index 2b20786..d27d016 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c
> > @@ -263,6 +263,9 @@ parse_general_features(struct drm_i915_private
> > *dev_priv,
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:16:01 -0800 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > > is this:
> >
> > Hmm.
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:16:01 -0800 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > > is this:
> >
> > Hmm.
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 22:18, Jesse Barnes wrote:
>> > + if (IS_GEN5(dev) || IS_GEN6(dev))
>> > + dev_priv->lvds_use_ssc = 0;
>>
>> Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>
> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
>
> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>
> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
> to panel power or backlight control. Have you tried bisecting for the
> problem between 2.6.35 and 2.6.36?
Nevermind, I just checked out the bug, looks like it is
> > Doesn't change anything here. Display stays blank.
>
> Sounds like your problem is separate from SSC then, more likely related
> to panel power or backlight control. Have you tried bisecting for the
> problem between 2.6.35 and 2.6.36?
Nevermind, I just checked out the bug, looks like it is
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 22:11:09 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 21:16, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> > Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> Chris - why did that lvds_ssc_freq thing suddenly start mattering? Can
> >> we please just disable spread-spectrum ent
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 22:11:09 +0100
Alex Riesen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 21:16, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> > Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> Chris - why did that lvds_ssc_freq thing suddenly start mattering? Can
> >> we please just disable spread-spectrum
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 21:16, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> Chris - why did that lvds_ssc_freq thing suddenly start mattering? Can
>> we please just disable spread-spectrum entirely? Or perhaps only if we
>> notice that it was enabled already
Le 29/12/10 21:16, Jesse Barnes a écrit :
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
>>> is this:
>>
>> Hmm. I suspect that difference
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> wrote:
> >
> > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > is this:
>
> Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
> 92971021c6328
On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 11:40:04 -0800
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
> wrote:
> >
> > The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> > is this:
>
> Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
> 92971021c6328
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> is this:
Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
92971021c6328 (Revert "drm: Don't try and disable an encoder that was
never enabled"), but
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Randy Dunlap
wrote:
>
> The only significant difference that I can see in the kernel message log
> is this:
Hmm. I suspect that difference should have gone away with commit
92971021c6328 (Revert "drm: Don't try and disable an encoder that was
never enabled"), bu
On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 17:18:12 -0800 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Another week, another -rc. This should be the last for the 37 series,
> so I still expect the merge window to open early January when people
> are hopefully back to working order after having eaten (and drunk) too
> much.
>
> The -rc8 rel
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:37:03PM +, ext Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:30:11 +0100, Domenico Andreoli
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:28PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > Go forth and test. And please do remember to ping bugzilla (or
> > >
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:37:03PM +, ext Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:30:11 +0100, Domenico Andreoli
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:28PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > > Go forth and test. And please do remember to ping bugzilla (or
> > >
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:30:11 +0100, Domenico Andreoli
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:28PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Go forth and test. And please do remember to ping bugzilla (or
> > developers) about any regressions you find, whether new or old.
>
> I have some
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:28PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Go forth and test. And please do remember to ping bugzilla (or
> developers) about any regressions you find, whether new or old.
I have some problem with i945, display remains blank. I also tried
adding i915.modeset=0 bu
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:30:11 +0100, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 07:10:28PM -0800, ext Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Go forth and test. And please do remember to ping bugzilla (or
> > developers) about any regressions you find, whether new or old.
>
> I have some p
90 matches
Mail list logo
