Re: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
- Original Message - > From: "Hans de Goede" > To: kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > Cc: "Lyude" , "Rob Clark" > Sent: Saturday, 18 June, 2016 1:52:07 AM > Subject: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora > 4.6 kernel > > Hi Fedora kernel team, > > If you look at: > > https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/ > > And look for skl_update_other_pipe_wm there, you will see > that it is completely dominating the problem report stats > (listed 4 times on the first page, 5 times on the second). I talked to #intel-gfx, they said the warn was pretty harmless and we could also just propose a stable patch to drop that warning. Though I'm also okay with backporting fixes. Dave. > > As such I'm thinking about backporting the patches: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg95595.html > > To the Fedora 4.6 kernel. > > Some of the reported problems are only a WARN_ON triggering, > but there are also quite a few cases of actually wrong > watermark settings causing various real problems. > > These patches have been around for a long time, but they missed > the 4.6 merge window, and then also the 4.7 merge window, they > are in next now. But IMHO we should grab them now since the > problems they are causing are too big to wait for 4.8 > hitting Fedora. > > So I would like to backport these to the 4.6 Fedora kernel > and have this completed before we start pushing 4.6 updated > to updates-testing. This way we can use the entire Fedora 4.6 > testing phase to also test the backported fixes. > > Before I spend time on this, does this sound like a good > plan ? I've already discussed this within the graphics > team and the consensus there seems to be that this is a good > idea. > > Regards, > > Hans > ___ > kernel mailing list > kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 17-06-16 18:35, Peter Robinson wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: >>> >>> This does indeed sound like a good plan, and would be much appreciated. >> >> >> We'd also need to land it in 4.7 too? > > > Yes, I'll take care of that too, though after doing it for 4.6. I'll all for this. 4.6 is in the stabilization branch if you didn't notice already. josh ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
Hi, On 17-06-16 18:35, Peter Robinson wrote: On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: This does indeed sound like a good plan, and would be much appreciated. We'd also need to land it in 4.7 too? Yes, I'll take care of that too, though after doing it for 4.6. Regards, Hans Hi Fedora kernel team, If you look at: https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/ And look for skl_update_other_pipe_wm there, you will see that it is completely dominating the problem report stats (listed 4 times on the first page, 5 times on the second). As such I'm thinking about backporting the patches: http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg95595.html To the Fedora 4.6 kernel. Some of the reported problems are only a WARN_ON triggering, but there are also quite a few cases of actually wrong watermark settings causing various real problems. These patches have been around for a long time, but they missed the 4.6 merge window, and then also the 4.7 merge window, they are in next now. But IMHO we should grab them now since the problems they are causing are too big to wait for 4.8 hitting Fedora. So I would like to backport these to the 4.6 Fedora kernel and have this completed before we start pushing 4.6 updated to updates-testing. This way we can use the entire Fedora 4.6 testing phase to also test the backported fixes. Before I spend time on this, does this sound like a good plan ? I've already discussed this within the graphics team and the consensus there seems to be that this is a good idea. Regards, Hans ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Justin Forbes wrote: > This does indeed sound like a good plan, and would be much appreciated. We'd also need to land it in 4.7 too? >> Hi Fedora kernel team, >> >> If you look at: >> >> https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/ >> >> And look for skl_update_other_pipe_wm there, you will see >> that it is completely dominating the problem report stats >> (listed 4 times on the first page, 5 times on the second). >> >> As such I'm thinking about backporting the patches: >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg95595.html >> >> To the Fedora 4.6 kernel. >> >> Some of the reported problems are only a WARN_ON triggering, >> but there are also quite a few cases of actually wrong >> watermark settings causing various real problems. >> >> These patches have been around for a long time, but they missed >> the 4.6 merge window, and then also the 4.7 merge window, they >> are in next now. But IMHO we should grab them now since the >> problems they are causing are too big to wait for 4.8 >> hitting Fedora. >> >> So I would like to backport these to the 4.6 Fedora kernel >> and have this completed before we start pushing 4.6 updated >> to updates-testing. This way we can use the entire Fedora 4.6 >> testing phase to also test the backported fixes. >> >> Before I spend time on this, does this sound like a good >> plan ? I've already discussed this within the graphics >> team and the consensus there seems to be that this is a good >> idea. >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans >> ___ >> kernel mailing list >> kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org >> > ___ > kernel mailing list > kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
This does indeed sound like a good plan, and would be much appreciated. Thanks, Justin On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Fedora kernel team, > > If you look at: > > https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/ > > And look for skl_update_other_pipe_wm there, you will see > that it is completely dominating the problem report stats > (listed 4 times on the first page, 5 times on the second). > > As such I'm thinking about backporting the patches: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg95595.html > > To the Fedora 4.6 kernel. > > Some of the reported problems are only a WARN_ON triggering, > but there are also quite a few cases of actually wrong > watermark settings causing various real problems. > > These patches have been around for a long time, but they missed > the 4.6 merge window, and then also the 4.7 merge window, they > are in next now. But IMHO we should grab them now since the > problems they are causing are too big to wait for 4.8 > hitting Fedora. > > So I would like to backport these to the 4.6 Fedora kernel > and have this completed before we start pushing 4.6 updated > to updates-testing. This way we can use the entire Fedora 4.6 > testing phase to also test the backported fixes. > > Before I spend time on this, does this sound like a good > plan ? I've already discussed this within the graphics > team and the consensus there seems to be that this is a good > idea. > > Regards, > > Hans > ___ > kernel mailing list > kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org > ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Backporting skl_update_other_pipe_wm intel drm fixes to the Fedora 4.6 kernel
Hi Fedora kernel team, If you look at: https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/problems/ And look for skl_update_other_pipe_wm there, you will see that it is completely dominating the problem report stats (listed 4 times on the first page, 5 times on the second). As such I'm thinking about backporting the patches: http://www.spinics.net/lists/intel-gfx/msg95595.html To the Fedora 4.6 kernel. Some of the reported problems are only a WARN_ON triggering, but there are also quite a few cases of actually wrong watermark settings causing various real problems. These patches have been around for a long time, but they missed the 4.6 merge window, and then also the 4.7 merge window, they are in next now. But IMHO we should grab them now since the problems they are causing are too big to wait for 4.8 hitting Fedora. So I would like to backport these to the 4.6 Fedora kernel and have this completed before we start pushing 4.6 updated to updates-testing. This way we can use the entire Fedora 4.6 testing phase to also test the backported fixes. Before I spend time on this, does this sound like a good plan ? I've already discussed this within the graphics team and the consensus there seems to be that this is a good idea. Regards, Hans ___ kernel mailing list kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
