Re: Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 regression ignored?

2011-05-29 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Hello Chris, everyone, On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote: > > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 May 2011 11:08:56 -0700, Ray Lee wrote: > > > > [ Adding Chris Wilson (author

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 regression ignored?

2011-07-12 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > Hello Chris, everyone, > > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote: > > > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chri

Re: Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-22 Thread Kirill Smelkov
[ Cc'ing Florian Mickler and Keith Packard ] On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 09:07:47PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> Hello Chris, everyone, > >&

Re: Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Keith, first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > And now after v3.0 is out, I've tested it again, and yes, like it was > > broken

Re: Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:23:36 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > What kind of a workaround are you talking about? > > Just reverting the commit -- that makes your machine work, even if it's > wrong for oth

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at > > this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality &g

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-26 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > > >>

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-31 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > Keith, > > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > Keith, > > > > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wr

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:02:59PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:56:01AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is > > it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no > > in

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-10 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those > >> particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers. > > > &g

Re: [Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-10 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:41:44AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup > > obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do, > > and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project. > > You seem confused. If

[PATCH 1/2] drm/radeon: "unregistered panic notifier" printk is redundant

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Because drm_fb_helper_free() prints the same. This redundant printk seems to be a forgotten leftover after 785b93ef (drm/kms: move driver specific fb common code to helper functions (v2)) -- let's remove it. Cc: Jerome Glisse Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov --- drivers/gpu/drm/r

[PATCH 0/2] drm: registering panic notifier cosmetics

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Just some minor tweaks from casual user. Please apply & thanks. Kirill Smelkov (2): drm/radeon: "unregistered panic notifier" printk is redundant drm: Prefix info printk about registering panic notifier with 'drm' drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c|4 ++--

[PATCH 2/2] drm: Prefix info printk about registering panic notifier with 'drm'

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
this message as going from drm subsystem. (I'm a bit unsure whether to use '[drm]:' or 'drm:' -- the rest of the kernel just uses 'topic:', and even in drm_fb_helper.c we use 'fb%d:' without [] brackets. Either way is ok with me.) Signed-off-by: Kirill

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > Keith, > > > > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... > > > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:48:27PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wr

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 05:00:52PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 15:08:03 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > >

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 07:02:59PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 18:34:46 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 06:09:57PM +0300, Vasily Khoruzhick wrote: > > > On Tuesday 09 August 2011 17:47:56 Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > >

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-09 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:56:01AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > Quite frankly, I don't understand intel-gfx developers attitude: why is > > it me, just random user who is nitpicking here? Why there is no > > in

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-10 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 10:43:08AM -0700, Ray Lee wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 10:40 AM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> If you like, submit a patch. You may now be more up-to-date on those > >> particular code paths than most of the intel-gfx developers. > > > &g

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-08-10 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:41:44AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > Sorry, I won't submit a patch. If there is a need to find/fix/cleanup > > obvious things after company's developers, I have better things to do, > > and a todo item to re-evaluate hardware for my next project. > > You seem confused. If

Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 regression ignored?

2011-05-28 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Hello Chris, everyone, On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote: > > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chris Wilson wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 May 2011 11:08:56 -0700, Ray Lee > > > wrote: > > > > [ Adding Chris Wilson (

[PATCH 1/2] drm/radeon: "unregistered panic notifier" printk is redundant

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Because drm_fb_helper_free() prints the same. This redundant printk seems to be a forgotten leftover after 785b93ef (drm/kms: move driver specific fb common code to helper functions (v2)) -- let's remove it. Cc: Jerome Glisse Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov --- drivers/gpu/drm/r

[PATCH 0/2] drm: registering panic notifier cosmetics

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Just some minor tweaks from casual user. Please apply & thanks. Kirill Smelkov (2): drm/radeon: "unregistered panic notifier" printk is redundant drm: Prefix info printk about registering panic notifier with 'drm' drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fb_helper.c|4 ++--

[PATCH 2/2] drm: Prefix info printk about registering panic notifier with 'drm'

2010-05-14 Thread Kirill Smelkov
this message as going from drm subsystem. (I'm a bit unsure whether to use '[drm]:' or 'drm:' -- the rest of the kernel just uses 'topic:', and even in drm_fb_helper.c we use 'fb%d:' without [] brackets. Either way is ok with me.) Signed-off-by: Kirill

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 regression ignored?

2011-07-12 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > Hello Chris, everyone, > > On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 04:40:17PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Sat, 21 May 2011 11:23:53 -0400, "Luke-Jr" wrote: > > > On Saturday, May 21, 2011 4:41:45 AM Chri

Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-22 Thread Kirill Smelkov
[ Cc'ing Florian Mickler and Keith Packard ] On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 09:07:47PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 05:19:20PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> Hello Chris, everyone, > >&

Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
Keith, first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > And now after v3.0 is out, I've tested it again, and yes, like it was > > broken

Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 00:23:36 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > > What kind of a workaround are you talking about? > > Just reverting the commit -- that makes your machine work, even if it's > wrong for oth

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > You're right, of course -- UMS is a huge wart on the kernel driver at > > this point, keeping it working while also adding new functionality &g

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-23 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:10:53AM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 01:08:14AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:50:04PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > > >>

[Intel-gfx] Major 2.6.38 / 2.6.39 / 3.0 regression ignored?

2011-07-26 Thread Kirill Smelkov
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:23:36AM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote: > Keith, > > first of all thanks for your prompt reply. Then... > > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:00:41AM -0700, Keith Packard wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:08:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov > > wrote: >

[PATCH] Revert "drm/i915: Initialise ring vfuncs for old DRI paths"

2011-06-29 Thread Kirill Smelkov
This reverts commit e8616b6ced6137085e6657cc63bc2fe3900b8616. See https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36052 Cc: Herbert Xu Cc: Florian Mickler Cc: Pekka Enberg Cc: Chris Wilson Cc: Keith Packard Cc: stable at kernel.org --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_dma.c | 25 +++