On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 12:12:16AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:46:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:37:00PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:10:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
> > > wrote:
> > > > https://bugs.freedesk
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:46:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:37:00PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:10:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
> > wrote:
> > > Hi Max,
> > >
> > > I currently am tracking 6 bug reports with the intel driver so far for
> > >
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:37:00PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:10:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
> wrote:
> > Hi Max,
> >
> > I currently am tracking 6 bug reports with the intel driver so far for
> > the oneiric development cycle, of which 5 have been forwarded upstream:
> >
Resume is missing a locks on gt sleepable registers.
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_suspend.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_suspend.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_suspend.c
index 60a94d2..9259dcf 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i91
Am Donnerstag, den 16.06.2011, 12:18 -0700 schrieb Jesse Barnes:
> Updated with comment.
>
> --
> Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
> >From 41bdb7457beb023faa0d465f483ab793ba8896e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jesse Barnes
> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:08:03 -0700
> Subject:
Rolf,
This looks to be the missing ingredient for your board. Can you please
give it a test?
-Chris
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:26 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> The comment was wrong, bus 0 is the SPD ROM, as we discovered in
> 14571b4 and b108333.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
> ---
> drivers
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:28 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
A GMBUS_RATE_MASK would complete the job.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-g
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:27 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> It's not wrong, but the text and the code describe different predicates
> and my brain kept stumbling over it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |5 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:25 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> This is general TMDS detect, not HDMI specifically.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
___
Intel-gfx mailing
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:24 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> I can't think of any sensible reason to limit this to a mask of 0x0f,
> ie, SDVO_OUTPUT_{TMDS,RGB,CVBS,SVID}0.
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
___
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 16:36:23 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> I have no evidence for this byte being used this way, and lots of
> counterexamples. Restore the struct to its empirical definition and
> patch up gmbus setup to match.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
Acked-by: Chris Wilson
--
Chris W
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c |8 +---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
index d3b903b..5d707c4 100644
--- a/dr
It's not wrong, but the text and the code describe different predicates
and my brain kept stumbling over it.
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |5 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
b/drivers
The comment was wrong, bus 0 is the SPD ROM, as we discovered in
14571b4 and b108333.
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |7 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_s
This is general TMDS detect, not HDMI specifically.
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
index 475f615..6d3dd09 100644
-
I can't think of any sensible reason to limit this to a mask of 0x0f,
ie, SDVO_OUTPUT_{TMDS,RGB,CVBS,SVID}0.
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c |3 +--
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sdvo.c
b/drivers/g
I have no evidence for this byte being used this way, and lots of
counterexamples. Restore the struct to its empirical definition and
patch up gmbus setup to match.
Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h |1 -
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_bios.c |6 ++
drive
For both:
Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter
--
Daniel Vetter
daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch - +41 (0) 79 364 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Hello. I'm trying latest Linus tree (v3.0-rc3-135-g19a1166) and the
suspend process generates lots of WARNINGs from i915 driver, this didn't
happen on 2.6.39 and apparently on 3.0-rc2 too.
The hardware is ASUS K53E with i5 2410M, so the chip is Intel HD 3000.
A sample warning:
[ 182.052219] WA
Updated with comment.
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
>From 41bdb7457beb023faa0d465f483ab793ba8896e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jesse Barnes
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:08:03 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: add Ivy Bridge page flip support
Use the blit ring for submitti
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:54:50 -0700
Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:19:14AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> > Use the blit ring for submitting flips since the render ring doesn't
> > generate flip complete interrupts.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:19:14AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Use the blit ring for submitting flips since the render ring doesn't
> generate flip complete interrupts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 30 ++
> 1 files
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:19:13AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> This makes things a little clearer and prevents us from running old code
> on a new chipset that may not be supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes
Reviewied-by: Ben Widawsky
___
Intel-
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 08:16:54 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 01:04:51PM +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> > The render HWSTAM is tweaked in preinstall, but we need to tweak the
> > blitter HWSTAM (new to gen6).
> >
> > To me, it makes sense to reset the blitter HWSTAM register
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:18:03 -0300, Leandro Lucarella
wrote:
> cannot access /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_error_state: No such file or
> directory
>
> The debug directory is not present, should I boot or compile with some
> particular option to enable it?
You need to compile with CONFIG_DEBUGF
Use the blit ring for submitting flips since the render ring doesn't
generate flip complete interrupts.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 30 ++
1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915
This makes things a little clearer and prevents us from running old code
on a new chipset that may not be supported.
Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h |3 +
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c | 269 +++---
2 files changed, 189
This set addresses comments from Dan and Chris, namely:
- pin & fence the new fb on the correct ring for IVB
- cleanup gen2/3 wait code by putting it in gen2/3 wait functions
- remove dead code
- fix a race in the split code with the interrupt handler and flip pending
Thanks,
Jesse
__
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 11:58:42 -0300, Leandro Lucarella
wrote:
> Hi, I've been experiencing sporadic graphic corruption since a few
> stable kernel versions and I always thought "maybe is fixed in the next
> release", so I upgrade, but I usually experience a different problem
> then. This problems
The taken action if saveBLC_PWM_CTL2 != 0 is surprising looking only at this
single function.
Out of the general habit of having a 1:1 mapping between registers and save*
variables, I suspect this is a typo. So here is a fix.
(Don't know if this is a user-visible bug though.)
Signed-off-by: Floria
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:41:23 +0200, Paul Rolland
(=?UTF-8?B?44Od44O844Or44O744Ot44Op44Oz?=) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've just booted 3.0.0-rc3 on my machine, and I got that message :
> Jun 16 15:32:07 tux kernel: [drm] GMBUS timed out, falling back to bit
> banging on pin 5 [i915 gmbus dpb]
>
> I
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 18:10:29 -0700, Bryce Harrington
wrote:
> Hi Max,
>
> I currently am tracking 6 bug reports with the intel driver so far for
> the oneiric development cycle, of which 5 have been forwarded upstream:
>
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36515
This looks to be a
32 matches
Mail list logo