On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:39:21PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:10:41PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:08:44PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> > > On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 06:41:51PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote: >> > > > Not implementing this W/A can lead to hangs. >> > > > >> > > > Cc: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> >> > > > Cc: Rafael Barbalho <[email protected]> >> > > > Cc: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> >> > > > Signed-off-by: Damien Lespiau <[email protected]> >> > > >> > > From reading the HSD, it's not a workaround. It was a spec bug. I >> > > presume the workaround name came from the workaround database? If it did >> > > not, I'd just drop any mention of "workaround." If it's in the >> > > workaround database, maybe just leave it so we can check later. >> > > >> > > Either way: >> > > Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> >> > >> > Oh, and I think CC: stable >> >> Queued for -next, thanks for the patch. >> -Daniel > > You want/need this in bdw-backports?
Should take the normal stable backport path, so no need for special handling. Well, if it doesn't conflict, I didn't check that ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
