On Thu, 1 Jul 2010 16:55:47 -0400
Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> [Dave, cc-ing you because your vt panic patch is involved.]
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:32:48 -0400
> > Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, A
Hi Carl,
> In the future, I think the right thing to do is to put the driver back
> into the X server repository. That would eliminate this problem
> entirely, (for future versions), and bisecting either X server or driver
> problems would work just fine.
I don't see what that would change - in b
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:31:31 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
wrote:
> When using an 2.9 driver compiled for 1.7 xorg, and 1.8 xorg, X
> complains about ABI mismatch. Recompiling the driver is supposed to
> fix this, but, I get the same error I got while building from git
> sources. In fact I
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:32:48 -0400
Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes
> > wrote:
> >> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700
> >> Jesse Barnes wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
2010/6/21 Christopher James Halse Rogers
:
> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 03:08 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva wrote:
>> ...Snip bits of Xorg.0.log...
>> [ 162.075] (EE) module ABI major version (7) doesn't match the
>> server's version (9)
>> [ 162.076] (II) UnloadModule: "evdev"
>
> You haven'
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700
>> Jesse Barnes wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
>>> Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 And
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 03:08 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva wrote:
> ...Snip bits of Xorg.0.log...
> [ 162.075] (EE) module ABI major version (7) doesn't match the
> server's version (9)
> [ 162.076] (II) UnloadModule: "evdev"
You haven't rebuilt your input drivers against the new Xserve
2010/6/18 Carl Worth :
>> I haven't tried driver 2.9 with xorg 1.8, because I supposed newer
>> xorg versions were incompatible with old drivers..
>
> I'd actually recommend using the newer X in both cases. I would hope
> that new X would work fine with an older driver, (but there might be
> some
2010/6/18 Carl Worth :
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:34:43 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
> wrote:
>> 2010/6/15 Carl Worth :
>> Hello! I'm, maybe, getting the same thing here. I haven't tested the
>> release candidate, but with Xorg 1.8 and driver 2.11, and a
>> kms-enabled 2.6.34 kernel, using
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
>> Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
>>
>> > On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> > > Neither patch applies for me.
>> >
>> > One
On Friday June 18 2010 22:04:50 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Ok here are some updated ones.
Already tried the patches. Now they both apply correctly on kernel 2.6.35-rc3.
However, this is what I find on the Xorg.0.log:
[ 463.790] (EE) intel(0): Detected a hung GPU, disabling acceleration.
If I try t
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:04:50 -0700
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700
> Jesse Barnes wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
> > Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > > > Neither patch applies for me.
> >
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700
Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
> Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
>
> > On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > > Neither patch applies for me.
> >
> > One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't.
> >
> > Testin
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:34:43 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva
wrote:
> 2010/6/15 Carl Worth :
> Hello! I'm, maybe, getting the same thing here. I haven't tested the
> release candidate, but with Xorg 1.8 and driver 2.11, and a
> kms-enabled 2.6.34 kernel, using gentoo, X just freezes. If I
>
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200
Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > Neither patch applies for me.
>
> One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't.
>
> Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails.
Arg, ok, I'll refresh the
On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Neither patch applies for me.
One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't.
Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails.
Regards
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-post
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:07:21 -0400
> Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Marc Deop i Argemí
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Wednesday June 16 2010 11:20:09 Chri
On Thursday June 17 2010 22:32:17 Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Are these both on 945?
Mine is on a 945GM
> If so, can you guys try two of the patches I
> posted earlier? In particular:
> drm/i915: fix page flipping on gen3
> drm/i915: don't queue flips during a flip pending event
>
Sure I can tr
2010/6/15 Carl Worth :
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:05:15 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí
> wrote:
>> The system just freezes :(
>>
>> I'm running archlinux, Mesa 7.8.1, libdrm 2.4.21, Xorg-server 1.8.1.901,
>> kernel 2.6.34.
>
> If the other components remain the same and you change only the driver
> to a
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:07:21 -0400
Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Marc Deop i Argemí
> > wrote:
> >> On Wednesday June 16 2010 11:20:09 Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >> Freeze is... freeze :P
> >>
> >> Now,
On Wednesday June 16 2010 18:12:38 Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> Sometimes I amaze myself :S It clearly says after this.
>
> I'll do that tonight
>
Finished the bisect although I don't think it was helpfull because all the
steps were negative: all made my computer freeze.
However, the output was
On Wednesday June 16 2010 15:57:41 Chris Wilson wrote:
> One more step. Test that commit and tell git bisect (good|bad) and it will
> print a slightly more verbose statement of which commit is triggering the
> freeze.
Sometimes I amaze myself :S It clearly says *after* this.
I'll do that tonight
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Marc Deop i Argemí
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday June 16 2010 11:20:09 Chris Wilson wrote:
>>
>> Freeze is... freeze :P
>>
>> Now, seriously, the computer stops responding. I'm not able to switch between
>> V
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:10:35 +0200, Marc Deop i ArgemÃ
wrote:
> On Wednesday June 16 2010 10:45:34 Marc Deop i Argemà wrote:
> > Anyway, I will try to bisect today and report back :)
>
> Well, I tried. Does this message:
>
> Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
>
On Wednesday June 16 2010 10:45:34 Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> Anyway, I will try to bisect today and report back :)
Well, I tried. Does this message:
Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[29ba8a84f7cf5c29a5f38688a1ac0ccf41d8e4ec] XvMC: everyone's using execbuffer!
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:25 AM, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> On Wednesday June 16 2010 11:20:09 Chris Wilson wrote:
>> After a freeze, can you grab a copy of dmesg, Xorg.log, intel_reg_dump,
>> and /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_error_state. From my perspective, the
>> last contains the most interes
On Wednesday June 16 2010 11:20:09 Chris Wilson wrote:
> After a freeze, can you grab a copy of dmesg, Xorg.log, intel_reg_dump,
> and /sys/kernel/debug/dri/0/i915_error_state. From my perspective, the
> last contains the most interesting information (the batchbuffer executing
> at the time of a gp
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:05:15 +0200, Marc Deop i ArgemÃ
wrote:
> On Tuesday June 15 2010 02:39:54 Carl Worth wrote:
> > This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming
> > 2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from
> > testing of this snapshot to improve t
On Tuesday June 15 2010 23:23:42 Carl Worth wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:12:28 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí
wrote:
> > That looks like a lot of work, ain't it? :S
>
> It shouldn't be, once you get the hang of compiling and running against
> a locally-compiled driver. There are about 176 commits
В сообщении от 15 июня 2010 23:15:02 автор Chris Wilson написал:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:58:57 +0200, Clemens Eisserer
wrote:
> > I also get artifacts with kde's oxygen QT theme, however everything
> > else looks great so far.
>
> Vasily, Clemens can you both try reverting f74b3f82 on top of 2.
Hi Chris,
> That does indeed seem to have an effect on KDE -- can you confirm if it
> fixes the rendering corruption and if there remains any?
With that change the corruptions seem to be gone.
- Clemens
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freede
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:05:34 +0200, Clemens Eisserer
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> > Â $ git checkout 2.11.901
> > Â $ git revert f74b3f82
> Ah thanks, didn't know the checkout thing.
>
> Hmm, if I revert that commit it no longer builds:
> CC i915_render.lo
> i915_render.c: In function âi915_p
Hi again,
I bisected and indeed f74b3f82 is the first bad commit:
f74b3f82bab11463a0f4de9f614fc6aa1492ef24 is the first bad commit
commit f74b3f82bab11463a0f4de9f614fc6aa1492ef24
Author: Chris Wilson
Date: Tue Jun 1 22:31:35 2010 +0100
i915; Avoid the implicit flush on changing BUF_INFO
Hi Chris,
> $ git checkout 2.11.901
> $ git revert f74b3f82
Ah thanks, didn't know the checkout thing.
Hmm, if I revert that commit it no longer builds:
CC i915_render.lo
i915_render.c: In function ‘i915_prepare_composite’:
i915_render.c:836: error: ‘intel_screen_private’ has no member na
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:03:27 +0200, Clemens Eisserer
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> > Vasily, Clemens can you both try reverting f74b3f82 on top of 2.11.901
> > and seeing if that fixes the corruption for you. It did not seem to make
> > a difference here...
>
> Sorry if that sounds stupid, but how can
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:03:27 +0200, Clemens Eisserer
wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> > Vasily, Clemens can you both try reverting f74b3f82 on top of 2.11.901
> > and seeing if that fixes the corruption for you. It did not seem to make
> > a difference here...
>
> Sorry if that sounds stupid, but how can
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:12:28 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí
wrote:
> That looks like a lot of work, ain't it? :S
It shouldn't be, once you get the hang of compiling and running against
a locally-compiled driver. There are about 176 commits between 2.11.0
and 2.11.901 so that should only require about
Hi Chris,
> Vasily, Clemens can you both try reverting f74b3f82 on top of 2.11.901
> and seeing if that fixes the corruption for you. It did not seem to make
> a difference here...
Sorry if that sounds stupid, but how can I do that?
Thanks Clemens
PS: Saw you experimented with shader based trap
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:58:57 +0200, Clemens Eisserer
wrote:
> I also get artifacts with kde's oxygen QT theme, however everything
> else looks great so far.
Vasily, Clemens can you both try reverting f74b3f82 on top of 2.11.901
and seeing if that fixes the corruption for you. It did not seem to
Hi,
I also get artifacts with kde's oxygen QT theme, however everything
else looks great so far.
Probably related to QT's gradient implementation, doing tons of put/getimage :/
- Clemens
2010/6/15 Vasily Khoruzhick :
> В сообщении от 15 июня 2010 03:39:54 автор Carl Worth написал:
>> This is th
On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 18:31 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 18:16:23 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 10:18 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> > >
> > > > New requirements compared
В сообщении от 15 июня 2010 19:55:55 автор Vasily Khoruzhick написал:
> > And if this behavior started only with this release candidate, would you
> > be willing to bisect the commits in the xf86-video-intel repository to
> > identify the offending commit?
>
> Ok, I'll do.
bisected:
First faulty
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 18:16:23 +0100, Sergio Monteiro Basto wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 10:18 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> >
> > > New requirements compared to 2.10
> > > -
> > > * Libdrm >= 2.4
On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 10:18 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
>
> > New requirements compared to 2.10
> > -
> > * Libdrm >= 2.4.19
> >
> The requirement is actually 2.4.21, afaict.
and libdrm >= 2.4.21 requi
On Tuesday June 15 2010 18:47:49 Carl Worth wrote:
> If the other components remain the same and you change only the driver
> to an older version does it then work reliably? If so could you please
> bisect the commits in the driver repository to find the offending one?
>
That looks like a lot of
В сообщении от 15 июня 2010 19:49:41 автор Carl Worth написал:
> > Sorry, but I got artifacts with latest version of libdrm and
> > xf86-video-intel on 945gm hardware (see attached screenshot).
>
> Thanks for the report.
>
> > If you need some additional info - just ask.
>
> Actually, I do. I'm
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 09:46:19 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:18:17 +0100, Julien Cristau
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> >
> > > New requirements compared to 2.10
> > > -
> > > * Libdrm >= 2.4.19
> >
> Sorry, but I got artifacts with latest version of libdrm and xf86-video-intel
> on 945gm hardware (see attached screenshot).
Thanks for the report.
> If you need some additional info - just ask.
Actually, I do. I'm not familiar enough with the particular theme you're
using to know what looks
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:05:15 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí
wrote:
> The system just freezes :(
>
> I'm running archlinux, Mesa 7.8.1, libdrm 2.4.21, Xorg-server 1.8.1.901,
> kernel 2.6.34.
If the other components remain the same and you change only the driver
to an older version does it then work
On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 10:18:17 +0100, Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
>
> > New requirements compared to 2.10
> > -
> > * Libdrm >= 2.4.19
> >
> The requirement is actually 2.4.21, afaict.
Can you give more details
On Tuesday June 15 2010 16:18:07 Julien Cristau wrote:
> On what hw?
My apologies:
Intel 945GMA, Centrino Duo T2400 1,83Ghz, 2'5Gb RAM, external monitor Samsung
SyncMaster 2233SN
By the way (and not related) from kernel 2.6.34 the default resolution is not
correct on my CRT getting the interna
В сообщении от 15 июня 2010 03:39:54 автор Carl Worth написал:
> This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming
> 2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from
> testing of this snapshot to improve the 2.12.0 release.
>
> -Carl
Sorry, but I got artifacts wit
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:05:15 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> On Tuesday June 15 2010 02:39:54 Carl Worth wrote:
> > This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming
> > 2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from
> > testing of this snapshot to improve
On Tuesday June 15 2010 02:39:54 Carl Worth wrote:
> This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming
> 2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from
> testing of this snapshot to improve the 2.12.0 release.
It makes my system really unstable. Sometimes I can't
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 17:39:54 -0700, Carl Worth wrote:
> New requirements compared to 2.10
> -
> * Libdrm >= 2.4.19
>
The requirement is actually 2.4.21, afaict.
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming
2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from
testing of this snapshot to improve the 2.12.0 release.
-Carl
--
carl.d.wo...@intel.com
Where to obtain xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
-
56 matches
Mail list logo
