[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix color order for BGR formats on IVB

2012-08-21 Thread Vijay Purushothaman
This is already fixed for ILK and SNB but somehow IVB is missed. Signed-off-by: Vijay Purushothaman Signed-off-by: Ben Lin --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c |6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_sprite.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/58] modeset-rework, the basic conversion

2012-08-21 Thread Chris Wilson
On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 21:12:17 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Hi all, > > Changes since last time around: > - The prep patches are all merged now. > - I've left out the actual DP fixes/cleanups, I think we should merge those > in a > separte step. > - A few bugfixes (thanks to Paulo, Jani and Ch

Re: [Intel-gfx] inux-next: Tree for Aug 21 (call-trace when suspending: PM?)

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
>>>>>>> The workqueues tree gained a conflict against the hid tree. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The drivers-x86 tree still has its build failure so I used the version > >>>>>>> from next-20120817. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/58] modeset-rework, the basic conversion

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 06:48:08PM +0100, Lespiau, Damien wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > I'll also plan to put tags for the entire series in the merge commit, so if > > you > > have tested this on a few machines, read through and agree with the new > > designs

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/58] modeset-rework, the basic conversion

2012-08-21 Thread Lespiau, Damien
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > I'll also plan to put tags for the entire series in the merge commit, so if > you > have tested this on a few machines, read through and agree with the new > designs, > please reply with your tested-by/acked-by/reviewed-by tags. Smoke-test

Re: [Intel-gfx] inux-next: Tree for Aug 21 (call-trace when suspending: PM?)

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
;>>>>> >>>>>> The drivers-x86 tree still has its build failure so I used the version >>>>>> from next-20120817. >>>>>> >>>>>> The signal tree gained a conflict against Linus' tree. I have still >>>

[Intel-gfx] [pull] drm-intel-fixes

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
Hi Dave, Nothing too major: - A few fixes around the edid handling from Jani, also fixing a regression in 3.5 due to us using gmbus by default. - Fixup hsw uncached pte flags. - Fix suspend/resume crash when using hw contexts, from Ben. - Try to tune gpu turbo a bit better, seems to help with so

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: enforce bitbanging for i2c

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:03:49PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Now that we have also have a workaround for crt to fallback to > > bitbanging in some cases and then restore gmbus again, we need to > > ensure that we don't try to enable gmbus on broken h

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: enforce bitbanging for i2c

2012-08-21 Thread Jani Nikula
On Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Now that we have also have a workaround for crt to fallback to > bitbanging in some cases and then restore gmbus again, we need to > ensure that we don't try to enable gmbus on broken hw (like i830M). > Previously only sdvo had a bit-banging fallback, an

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: enforce bitbanging for i2c

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
Now that we have also have a workaround for crt to fallback to bitbanging in some cases and then restore gmbus again, we need to ensure that we don't try to enable gmbus on broken hw (like i830M). Previously only sdvo had a bit-banging fallback, and sdvo is gen3+ only, so no issue with that. Enfor

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH intel-gpu-tools] tools: Added intel_dpio_read and intel_dpio_write

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 06:06:52PM +0530, Vijay Purushothaman wrote: > In Valleyview the DPLL and lane control registers are accessible only > through side band fabric called DPIO. Added two tools to read and write > registers residing in this space. > > v2: Moved the core read/write functions to

Re: [Intel-gfx] Find bugs in i915 driver

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 08:07:43AM +, Xu, Anhua wrote: > Hi, Paul > > Thanks for your advice. I update my patch. Please review, for your question, > please see my reply below. > > From d11080eda81c0503b5035ea40667b06fe2ee0fb5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Anhua Xu > Date: Tue, 31 Jul 20

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: fix reassignment of variable "intel_dp->DP"

2012-08-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 03:06:02AM +, Xu, Anhua wrote: > From 952c95621b5fd95a629c36017c36ac9e6c40e839 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Anhua Xu > Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 11:00:57 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] drm/i915: fix reassignment of variable "intel_dp->DP" > > This little regression was intr

Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] glamor 0.5.0

2012-08-21 Thread zhigang gong
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Rémi Cardona wrote: > Hi Zhigang, > > Le vendredi 10 août 2012 à 18:37 +0800, Zhigang Gong a écrit : >> tar ball is at: >> >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/snapshot/glamor-0.5.tar.gz > > This is a git snapshot, not a tarball made using automake's

Re: [Intel-gfx] glxdemo/glxpixmap doesn't work, please help

2012-08-21 Thread Meng, David
Hi Ben: Thank you for your quick response. We will follow the direction to file bug. The reason we knew the GPU hangs on 0x64 is because the head of the render ring buffer is equal to the ox64 and never move again. That means the next data or instruction GPU CS fetches should be 0x64. We also

Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] glamor 0.5.0

2012-08-21 Thread Rémi Cardona
Hi Zhigang, Le vendredi 10 août 2012 à 18:37 +0800, Zhigang Gong a écrit : > tar ball is at: > > http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/driver/glamor/snapshot/glamor-0.5.tar.gz This is a git snapshot, not a tarball made using automake's "make dist" like all X.org modules use. Is one planned? Cheers,