Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Kyle McMartin
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 03:53:32PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: Even if Stepane doesn't care, people inside RedHat/Fedora must care. Are you guys simply planning on never supporting F12 with 2.6.34? I'd expect it to be a _major_ pain to have that whole hardcoded X and kernel must always

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Tony Luck
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: And if we end up having people bisecting back and forth, I will hate that f*cking nouveau driver even more. Would it help to tag the flag day commit? At least that would make it trivial for bisecters to see

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Robert Hancock
On 03/04/2010 01:32 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: On 03/04/2010 02:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Please note that these drivers are under heavy development, may or may not work, and may contain userspace interfaces that most likely will be changed in the near future. Shipping it as the default

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Ed Tomlinson
On Thursday 04 March 2010 18:53:32 Linus Torvalds wrote: On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Dave Airlie wrote: I'm not saying it doesn't happen in other drivers from time to time, but when it does its treated as regression, for nouveau and STAGING that isn't what the Nouveau project (which Stephane

Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: blacklist lid status: Sony VGN-BX196VP, Dell Inspiron 700m

2010-03-05 Thread Surbhi Palande
Hi Eric, On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 15:34 -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 22:59:52 +0200, Surbhi Palande surbhi.pala...@canonical.com wrote: BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/515246 Sony VGN-BX196VP and Dell Inspiron 700m report lid status as closed when it is open.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Stephane Marchesin
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 23:44, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: * Pekka Enberg penb...@cs.helsinki.fi wrote: On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a flag day cleanup/feature/etc is: ?- wrong ?- harmful

Improved GPU reset

2010-03-05 Thread Jerome Glisse
This patches improve the GPU reset, many time i able to successfully reset the GPU and carry on operation, note that after a reset you will likely see corrpution on the screen. Hope is that we should now be able to capture faulty command stream. I still need to do a full retesting with this patch

[PATCH 2/3] drm/radeon/kms: rename gpu_reset to asic_reset

2010-03-05 Thread Jerome Glisse
Patch rename gpu_reset to asic_reset in prevision of having gpu_reset doing more stuff than just basic asic reset. Signed-off-by: Jerome Glisse jgli...@redhat.com --- drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/evergreen.c |2 +- drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/r100.c |6 ++--

[PATCH 3/3] drm/radeon/kms: simplify improve GPU reset

2010-03-05 Thread Jerome Glisse
This simplify and improve GPU reset for R1XX-R6XX hw, it's not 100% reliable here are result: - R1XX/R2XX works bunch of time in a row, sometimes it seems it can work indifinitly - R3XX/R3XX the most unreliable one, sometimes you will be able to reset few times, sometimes not even once - R5XX

Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Carlos R. Mafra
On Fri 5.Mar'10 at 8:44:07 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: Yeah. I've seen a few other bad arguments as well: 'exploding test matrix' This is often the result of _another_ bad technical decision: over-modularization. Xorg, mesa/libdrm and the kernel DRM drivers pretty share this

[Bug 26887] fence errors with rs785 and kernel 2.6.33

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26887 --- Comment #2 from Jerome Glisse gli...@freedesktop.org 2010-03-05 03:07:44 PST --- Does this happen all the time ? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because:

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Jeff Garzik
On 03/04/2010 05:59 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 17:21 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: # sed -i 's/\kernel\.*/ nouveau.modeset=0/g' /etc/grub.conf Never tried this part. The bug I'm assuming you're referring to is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=519298 in which

[Bug 26887] fence errors with rs785 and kernel 2.6.33

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26887 Marc marvi...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||marvi...@gmx.de --- Comment #3

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a flag day cleanup/feature/etc is: Ingo go read the staging Kconfig. It's crystal clear, and lots of vendor junk that is in there being cleaned up it would be *insane* to keep their old APIs See there's a bigger offence than breaking an ABI

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 11:00:30 +0100, Carlos R. Mafra said: Why can't there be a 'Linus Torvalds' for Xorg accepting patches from various maintainers and keeping the whole thing tied up? Why can't it mimic the 'make menuconfig' way of selecting what to compile to have the guarantee that the

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Luc Verhaegen
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 08:44:07AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: Yeah. I've seen a few other bad arguments as well: 'exploding test matrix' This is often the result of _another_ bad technical decision: over-modularization. Xorg, mesa/libdrm and the kernel DRM drivers pretty share this

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
So man up, guys. Face the problem, rather than say well, it's staging, or well, we can revert it. Neither of those really solve anything in the short run _or_ the long run. Linus stop and think for a minute instead. Maybe a timeline would help Nouveau development starts

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 14:32:02 -0500 Jeff Garzik j...@garzik.org wrote: On 03/04/2010 02:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: Please note that these drivers are under heavy development, may or may not work, and may contain userspace interfaces that most likely will be changed in the near future.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
Why does the X community not understand simple library versioning? Why does Linus Torvalds not understand the Kconfig of his own staging directory ? Alan -- Download Intel#174; Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 12:38:34 + The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a flag day cleanup/feature/etc is: Ingo go read the staging Kconfig. It's crystal clear, and lots of vendor junk that is in there being cleaned up it would be

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the way it's breaking and making kernel development difficult for so many people matters to us. It's about the tester base, and this breakage shrinks the tester base

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:09:34 + I think you miss a bigger picture ? If Fedora hadn't merged it then it wouldn't have gotten to the state of usability it had. If Fedora hadn't merged it then several hundred thousand users wouldn't have had useful

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, C. Bergström wrote: staging != stable This really is being repeated, over and over. But it's irrelevant. It's irrelevant because it's just a bad _excuse_. That driver is used in production environments. That's _reality_. The whole staging thing is nothing more than a

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Mike Galbraith
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 06:37 -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 12:38:34 + The conclusion is crystal clear, breaking an ABI via a flag day cleanup/feature/etc is: Ingo go read the staging Kconfig. It's crystal clear, and lots

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Matt Turner
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Carlos R. Mafra crmaf...@gmail.com wrote: Why can't there be a 'Linus Torvalds' for Xorg accepting patches from various maintainers and keeping the whole thing tied up? Why can't it mimic the 'make menuconfig' way of selecting what to compile to have the

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:17:54 +0200 On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:37:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote: If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the way it's breaking and making

[Bug 26347] powermanagement on rs780 not working

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26347 --- Comment #21 from Marc marvi...@gmx.de 2010-03-05 07:34:18 PST --- Rafał, this seems to work. radeon_pm_info shows proper switching. Also I get some more frames in glxgears (538-588) so I guess the gpu really runs faster now. However, the

[Bug 26887] fence errors with rs785 and kernel 2.6.33

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26887 --- Comment #4 from Alex Deucher ag...@yahoo.com 2010-03-05 07:37:28 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) yes - could this be sideport related? Not likely. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ---

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
Personally I wouldn't have ever committed to that user visible APIs can break cause it's in -stable. Because that's complete garbage Staging has to have the no API rules. Read some of the stuff in there to understand why or apply about 30 seconds of thought to what it would mean to you. There

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi, On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:26:12AM -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:37:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote: If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 10:22:27AM -0500, Matt Turner wrote: On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 5:00 AM, Carlos R. Mafra crmaf...@gmail.com wrote: Why can't there be a 'Linus Torvalds' for Xorg accepting patches from various maintainers and keeping the whole thing tied up? Why can't it mimic the

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:37:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote: If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the way it's breaking and making kernel development difficult for so many people matters to us. Maybe the lesson to

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Adam Jackson
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 06:24 -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote: On 03/04/2010 05:59 PM, Adam Jackson wrote: in which you merely remove the nouveau userspace component, and in which I can't tell if you built nouveau into the kernel or not, but I assume you didn't based on your previous post. The X

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:40:09 +0200 On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:26:12AM -0800, David Miller wrote: In fact, I argue that the moment nouveau went into Fedora and was turned on by default, the interfaces needed to be frozen. That's a matter for the

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:41:43 +0200 I understand that you guys are upset about this, so maybe you'd like to donate, say, 10% of your developer base to help out? That'd be pretty ace. You have to support less than %10 of the amount of hardware we have

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Carlos R. Mafra wrote: Whereas everytime I wanted to do that with Xorg it was such a pain that I want to keep away from that mess. Actually, take it from me: Xorg is _pleasant_ to test these days. Ok, so that's partly compared to the mess it _used_ to be, but it's

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Luca Barbieri
It seems to me that Linus' technical argument is indeed being mostly ignored. While breaking the ABI is unfortunate, the real problem that Linus complained about is that you can't install several userspace versions side-by-side. This means that if you install your new kernel and userspace,

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
You can't unleash something like this on a userbase of this magnitude and then throw your hands up in the air and say I'm not willing to support this in a reasonable way. Not to belabour the obvious - they didn't. Linus ordered them to merge it. We're better than that. If you consider the

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 07:49:32 -0800 (PST) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:41:43 +0200 I understand that you guys are upset about this, so maybe you'd like to donate, say, 10% of your developer base to help out? That'd

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:48:35AM -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:26:12AM -0800, David Miller wrote: In fact, I argue that the moment nouveau went into Fedora and was turned on by default, the interfaces needed to be frozen.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 16:02:17 + You can't unleash something like this on a userbase of this magnitude and then throw your hands up in the air and say I'm not willing to support this in a reasonable way. Not to belabour the obvious - they didn't.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 18:04:34 +0200 So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your ABI absolutely rock-solid stable for eternity, no exceptions, ever? Cool, that

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:49:32AM -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org I understand that you guys are upset about this, so maybe you'd like to donate, say, 10% of your developer base to help out? That'd be pretty ace. You have to support less than %10 of

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, David Miller wrote: In fact, I argue that the moment nouveau went into Fedora and was turned on by default, the interfaces needed to be frozen. Now, I agree that that would have been the optimal setup from a testing an user standpoint, but I think it's a bit too strong.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 16:56:10 +0100 Luca Barbieri luca.barbi...@gmail.com wrote: It seems to me that Linus' technical argument is indeed being mostly ignored. While breaking the ABI is unfortunate, the real problem that Linus complained about is that you can't install several userspace

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Daniel Stone
Hi, On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 07:53:46AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: These days, there's a few dependencies you need to know about (I do agree that from a user perspective the thing might have been made a bit _too_ modular) Indeed, no argument here. That said, the _one_ thing I really wish

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alan Cox wrote: You can't unleash something like this on a userbase of this magnitude and then throw your hands up in the air and say I'm not willing to support this in a reasonable way. Not to belabour the obvious - they didn't. Linus ordered them to merge it.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Adam Jackson
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 15:03 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Adam Jackson wrote: On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 11:14 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: Two wrong choices don't make a right. So unmerge it. That's what I told people I can do (I'd just revert that commit). Read it

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:44:07 +0100 Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote: It's a bit as if we split up the kernel into 'microkernel' components, did a VFS ABI, MM ABI, drivers ABI, scheduler ABI, networking ABI and arch ABIs, and then tried to develop them as separate components. If we did then

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alan Cox wrote: Yeah perhaps Fedora should have pushed an update that was smart enough to handle the Nouveau old/new ABI before the patch went upstream. Hindsight is an exact science. Alan - it seems you're missing the whole point. The thing I objected to, in the VERY

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
So the watershed moment was _never_ the Linus merged it. The watershed moment was always Fedora started shipping it. That's when the problems with a standard upstream kernel started. Why is that so hard for people to understand? So why are you screaming at the DRM and Nouveau people about

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Luca Barbieri
I think you need to be clearer about that. Your distribution packaging may not support that out of the box. There are a variety of ways to do almsot all of this including having entire parallel X installs for development work. Sure, but each user must manually find out how to setup that, and

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 07:53:46 -0800 (PST) Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Carlos R. Mafra wrote: Whereas everytime I wanted to do that with Xorg it was such a pain that I want to keep away from that mess. Actually, take it from me: Xorg is

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:06:26 -0800 (PST) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 18:04:34 +0200 So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
The thing I objected to, in the VERY BEGINNING in this thread, i the fact that the thing was done in such a way that it's basically impossible to support the old/new ABI at all! What did you expect them to do. They said when you first forced a merge that they would do this. They have no

Re: Making Xorg easier to test (was Re: [git pull] drm request 3)

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Daniel Stone wrote: FWIW, Option ModulePath in xorg.conf lets you more or less do this; the usual approach is to install your new server + drivers into a separate prefix. The thing is, Xorg has - and I think for _very_ good reasons - deprecated using xorg.conf at all.

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Alan Cox wrote: So the watershed moment was _never_ the Linus merged it. The watershed moment was always Fedora started shipping it. That's when the problems with a standard upstream kernel started. Why is that so hard for people to understand? So why are you

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Alan Cox
Look at who I screamed at. Dave Airlie. The guy who works for Red Hat. The guy who is, as far as I know, effectively in charge of that whole integration. Yeah, I realize that there are other people (Kyle?) involved, and maybe Dave isn't as central as I think he is, but I learnt from last

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Linus Torvalds
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Daniel Stone wrote: So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your ABI absolutely rock-solid stable for eternity, no exceptions, ever? I think that's what David ended up saying, but I

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread C. Bergström
Alan Cox wrote: Look at who I screamed at. Dave Airlie. The guy who works for Red Hat. The guy who is, as far as I know, effectively in charge of that whole integration. Yeah, I realize that there are other people (Kyle?) involved, and maybe Dave isn't as central as I think he is, but I

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Jerome Glisse
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 04:31:29PM +, Alan Cox wrote: On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 08:06:26 -0800 (PST) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 18:04:34 +0200 So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Xavier Bestel xavier.bes...@free.fr Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:50:24 +0100 On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:49 -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:41:43 +0200 I understand that you guys are upset about this, so maybe you'd like to

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Younes Manton
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 11:05 AM, David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 16:02:17 + You can't unleash something like this on a userbase of this magnitude and then throw your hands up in the air and say I'm not willing to

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:54:06 -0800 (PST) David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote: From: Xavier Bestel xavier.bes...@free.fr Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:50:24 +0100 On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:49 -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:41:43

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread David Miller
From: Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 10:02:44 -0800 So from that perspective, the graphics stack is the most complex one in Linux by a long shot. It's even worse than if we had STREAMS networking with a ton of different modules up in userspace messing with

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Mike Galbraith efa...@gmx.de wrote: On the bright side, all this hubbub sends a very positive message to the noveau development crew. Folks, your work is important. I'd be proud as a peacock :) Heh, most definitely so! Noveau really is a game-changer i think, it's a big break-through

Re: Making Xorg easier to test

2010-03-05 Thread Xavier Bestel
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 07:49 -0800, David Miller wrote: From: Daniel Stone dan...@fooishbar.org Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:41:43 +0200 I understand that you guys are upset about this, so maybe you'd like to donate, say, 10% of your developer base to help out? That'd be pretty ace. You

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Jeff Garzik
On 03/05/2010 10:17 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:37:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote: If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the way it's breaking and making kernel development difficult for so

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread tytso
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Daniel Stone wrote: So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your ABI absolutely rock-solid stable for eternity, no exceptions, ever? Cool, that worked really well

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread tytso
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 05:04:14PM +, Alan Cox wrote: You can only see it as malicious if you assume they ever had some reason to keep compatibility or had promised it somewhere. Quite the reverse happened, and they never asked to be upstream in the first place. The reason why this thread

[PATCH] drm/radeon/kms: add PM quirk for Asus Radeon HD 3200

2010-03-05 Thread Rafał Miłecki
Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki zaj...@gmail.com --- drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_pm.c | 18 ++ 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_pm.c index 6b65f15..a2ea0be 100644 ---

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Corbin Simpson
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:46 AM, ty...@mit.edu wrote: On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Daniel Stone wrote: So you're saying that there's no way to develop any reasonable body of code for the Linux kernel without committing to keeping your ABI absolutely rock-solid stable for

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Eric Anholt
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 12:21:29 +, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: Serious discussion point perhaps should be: is the libdrm so close to the kernel it ought to be in the same git tree ? Alternatively does it need to be easier to have multiple Nouveau libdrms autoselected according to

[PATCH] drm/radeon/kms: gfx init fixes for r6xx/r7xx

2010-03-05 Thread Alex Deucher
From cec90cfdc0f20efcbcd266069a6a8234d230cc0b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 14:50:37 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] drm/radeon/kms: gfx init fixes for r6xx/r7xx This fixes some issues with the last gfx init patch. Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Luca Barbieri
 So overall, I'd say that we spent about a month of developer time at least between jbarnes, ickle, and myself, on extending the execbuf interface to add a flag saying dear kernel, please don't do this bit of work on this buffer, because I don't need it and it makes things slow. Perhaps then,

i965 OpenGL is heavily broken again

2010-03-05 Thread Maxim Levitsky
After quite long period of inactivity, I updated graphical stack on my desktop/server. To say the truth, I did such update about month ago, but found out that X refuses flatly to use DRI modules. I assumed that it was my mistake in compilation process (although it is automated). Now I repeat

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] i965 OpenGL is heavily broken again

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:42:21 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: After quite long period of inactivity, I updated graphical stack on my desktop/server. To say the truth, I did such update about month ago, but found out that X refuses flatly to use DRI modules. I assumed that

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Corbin Simpson
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Corbin Simpson mostawesomed...@gmail.com wrote: I was trying my hardest to not say anything, but... [blah blah Fedora blah Ubuntu blah staging blah blah] That said... Code probably is moving too fast inside nouveau. There is a bit of a wall to go through to

[Bug 26195] Green screen on HDMI with RV730

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26195 --- Comment #15 from Michael Lothian m...@fireburn.co.uk 2010-03-05 13:04:29 PST --- Was this what you were after? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because:

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] i965 OpenGL is heavily broken again

2010-03-05 Thread Maxim Levitsky
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 12:55 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:42:21 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: After quite long period of inactivity, I updated graphical stack on my desktop/server. To say the truth, I did such update about month ago, but found

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] i965 OpenGL is heavily broken again

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:18:07 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 12:55 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:42:21 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: After quite long period of inactivity, I updated graphical stack on

Re: [Mesa3d-dev] i965 OpenGL is heavily broken again

2010-03-05 Thread Maxim Levitsky
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 13:36 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 23:18:07 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 12:55 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 22:42:21 +0200 Maxim Levitsky maximlevit...@gmail.com wrote: After

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Corbin Simpson
Strawman, mostly because all distros suck, the less patches you apply the less likely things are to work, LFS is the most fragile thing out there, etc. Hurp derp. If you need a feature not in the distro, and it is needed because you have installed something not in the distro or not new enough,

[Bug 26195] Green screen on HDMI with RV730

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26195 --- Comment #16 from Rafał Miłecki zaj...@gmail.com 2010-03-05 15:22:56 PST --- (In reply to comment #15) Was this what you were after? Well, I'm afraid there is something wrong about your testing. I don't see any reason how my first (fast

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: On Fri, 5 Mar 2010, Ben Skeggs wrote: The F13 packages *will* work, so long as you're not bisecting back and forth. How do I install just the F13 libdrm thing, without changing everything else? I'm willing to

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Justin P. mattock
On 03/05/2010 09:42 AM, Jeff Garzik wrote: On 03/05/2010 10:17 AM, Daniel Stone wrote: On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 06:37:18AM -0800, David Miller wrote: If it effects such a large number of people, which this noveau thing does, it's entirely relevant to everyone. And the way it's breaking and

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread tytso
On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 11:38:46AM -0800, Corbin Simpson wrote: If distros want to run weird experiments on their users, let them! Sure, sometimes bad things happen, but sometimes good things happen too. ConsoleKit, DeviceKit, HAL, NetworkManager, KMS, yaird, dracut, Plymouth, the list goes on

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote: The thing I objected to, in the VERY BEGINNING in this thread, i the fact that the thing was done in such a way that it's basically impossible to support the old/new ABI at all! [...] The way this was done,

Re: Move lists to freedesktop.org?

2010-03-05 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:37:23PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org? The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the post lag and non-subscriber aspect of the current lists, Err, how would moving the

Re: [git pull] drm request 3

2010-03-05 Thread Garry Hurley
Distro's that want to have a good reputation need to have a higher standard than, hey, it's allowed by the GPL. And maybe if we are sinking to the point where people are going to use stable means ABI breakages are allowed, we need to change the rules, since people want to quote rules as

Re: Move lists to freedesktop.org?

2010-03-05 Thread Jesse Barnes
On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 23:19:13 +0100 olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:37:23PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org? The recent thread with Linus about the drm pull request highlights the post lag and

Re: Move lists to freedesktop.org?

2010-03-05 Thread Michel Dänzer
On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 16:11 -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: On Fri, 5 Mar 2010 23:19:13 +0100 olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:37:23PM -0800, Jesse Barnes wrote: Would anyone have objections if these lists moved to freedesktop.org? The recent thread

[PATCH] drm/radeon/r600: add missing license and comments to r600_blit_shaders.c

2010-03-05 Thread Alex Deucher
From 6e323fc30b00aac303973ef3d5cadd4ba1f228c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Deucher alexdeuc...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 19:22:24 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] drm/radeon/r600: add missing license and comments to r600_blit_shaders.c R6xx+ cards need to use the 3D engine to blit data which

[Bug 26496] OpenGL does not work on Radeon 9600 (r300)

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26496 --- Comment #9 from Joseph Jezak jos...@gentoo.org 2010-03-05 16:42:54 PST --- I'm using kernel 2.6.33, libdrm-2.4.16 and not using KMS, but if you'd like I can try that as well. Bisected, and came up with this as the problem commit:

[Bug 26195] Green screen on HDMI with RV730

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26195 --- Comment #17 from Michael Lothian m...@fireburn.co.uk 2010-03-05 17:25:16 PST --- This was using the latest head of drm-radeon-testing which has been working fine for a while as per this bug Did you want me to go back to when I had

[Bug 26570] [r6xx DRI] KMS enabled: GLSL white washing corruption (seen in Second Life)

2010-03-05 Thread bugzilla-daemon
http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26570 Shawn Starr shawn.st...@rogers.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED