On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I'll see how painful it is to bisect it,
Not surprisingly, it went right for the drm merge.
Commit 8c334ce8f0fe ("Merge branch 'timers-core-for-linus'..") is
good, while the next merge commit 796e1c55717e ("Merge branch
'drm-next' ..")
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5847
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV -1 282/282
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I'm not sure how new these problems are, I think the previous kernel I
> booted on this machine was 3.16.
Hmm. 3.19 works fine, even if it ends up spewing
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 6 at drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c:1121
drm_wait_one_vblank+0
Hmm. I haven't updated the old Mac Mini I have in a *long* time, but
today I decided to try.
And it causes problems in drm.
I'm not sure how new these problems are, I think the previous kernel I
booted on this machine was 3.16. But I thought I'd better report them
as-is, because bisection on this
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5845
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5844
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5843
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV -1 282/282
On 28 Feb, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 03:20:37PM +0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> > Unfortunately this is not the last bug, that breaks i915/drm working
> > on my laptop. Sometimes system successfully loads with couple warnings
> > mentioned in
> > previous mail:
> >
> > [ 26
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 03:20:37PM +0300, Andrey Skvortsov wrote:
> Unfortunately this is not the last bug, that breaks i915/drm working
> on my laptop. Sometimes system successfully loads with couple warnings
> mentioned in
> previous mail:
>
> [ 26.922953] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 767 at
> drive
On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 02:54:08PM +, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> Implicit usage of local variables in macros isn't exactly the greatest
> thing in the world, especially when that variable is the drm device and
> we want to move towards a broader use of the i915 device structure.
>
> Let's make fo
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5842
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
The kernel doesn't actually wait indefinately when passed a negative,
timeout, it returns immediately. Document this and suggest using INT64_MAX
for indefinite waits.
Signed-off-by: Kristian Høgsberg
---
We first check if the object is already idle and return 0 if so. Then
we hit this conditio
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5841
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV -1 282/282
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5840
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
Implicit usage of local variables in macros isn't exactly the greatest
thing in the world, especially when that variable is the drm device and
we want to move towards a broader use of the i915 device structure.
Let's make for_each_sprite() take dev_priv as its first argument then.
Suggested-by: C
Implicit usage of local variables in macros isn't exactly the greatest
thing in the world, especially when that variable is the drm device and
we want to move towards a broader use of the i915 device structure.
Let's make for_each_plane() take dev_priv as its first argument then.
Suggested-by: Ch
When upstreaming the SKL WM series I didn't really want to go, again, rework
the patches for a small change like that. I promissed I'd get around to do it
though and sounds about the right time.
--
Damien
Damien Lespiau (2):
drm/i915: Make for_each_plane() take dev_priv as argument
drm/i915:
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5839
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV -1 282/282
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5838
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5837
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV 282/282
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 3:54 AM, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Michael Leuchtenburg wrote:
> > Okay, here's the results:
> > : 12 0a 02 41 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 00
> > 0070: 01 00
> > 0080: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
> > 0100: 0a 02 00 09 09 00 00 00
Tested-By: PRC QA PRTS (Patch Regression Test System Contact:
shuang...@intel.com)
Task id: 5836
-Summary-
Platform Delta drm-intel-nightly Series Applied
PNV -1 282/282
22 matches
Mail list logo
