https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43288
Bug #: 43288
Summary: drmSLLookup() returns wrong value.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: DRI
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 22:29:12 +0600, Rakib Mullick
> wrote:
>> Yes, no real problem with current code. I was just thinking from code
>> cleanup's pov. Is BUG_ON really needed in i915_add_request() ?
>
> No, just documentation as a reminder t
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:08:31 -0500
Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> Dave & Alan:
>
> Maybe I am goofing up something on my end, but gma500 driver on drm-next
> branch
> won't compile for me. I have to apply the two patches that follow this
> note to make it work.
>
> The first is a trivial oversight, but
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43278
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Nieder 2011-11-27 10:19:47
PST ---
Hi Rolf,
Actually there's one more test that it would be useful to try. Please try
preventing the radeon driver from being loaded at boot time, like this:
echo 'blacklist radeon
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43278
Bug #: 43278
Summary: System hangs after suspend to ram or disk cause radeon
firmware cannot be loaded.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: DRI
Version: XOrg 6.7.0
P
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang
---
drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c |8
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_tt.c| 16
drivers/gpu/drm/vmwgfx/vmwgfx_gmr.c |6 +++---
3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_cache.c b/drivers
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011 11:08:31 -0500
Ilija Hadzic wrote:
> Dave & Alan:
>
> Maybe I am goofing up something on my end, but gma500 driver on drm-next
> branch
> won't compile for me. I have to apply the two patches that follow this
> note to make it work.
>
> The first is a trivial oversight, but
fops field in drm_driver is a pointer to file_operations
struct, not embedded structure
Signed-off-by: Ilija Hadzic
---
drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c | 23 ---
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c b/drivers/gpu
psb_gfx.mod.c is a generated file and should not be
revision controlled
Signed-off-by: Ilija Hadzic
---
drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_gfx.mod.c | 51 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_gfx.mod.c
diff
Dave & Alan:
Maybe I am goofing up something on my end, but gma500 driver on drm-next branch
won't compile for me. I have to apply the two patches that follow this
note to make it work.
The first is a trivial oversight, but the second makes me wonder whether
a stale driver was merged.
-- Ilija
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43278
--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Nieder 2011-11-27 10:19:47
PST ---
Hi Rolf,
Actually there's one more test that it would be useful to try. Please try
preventing the radeon driver from being loaded at boot time, like this:
echo 'blacklist radeon
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43278
Bug #: 43278
Summary: System hangs after suspend to ram or disk cause radeon
firmware cannot be loaded.
Classification: Unclassified
Product: DRI
Version: XOrg 6.7.0
P
fops field in drm_driver is a pointer to file_operations
struct, not embedded structure
Signed-off-by: Ilija Hadzic
---
drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c | 23 ---
1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_drv.c b/drivers/gpu
psb_gfx.mod.c is a generated file and should not be
revision controlled
Signed-off-by: Ilija Hadzic
---
drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_gfx.mod.c | 51 --
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
delete mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_gfx.mod.c
diff
Dave & Alan:
Maybe I am goofing up something on my end, but gma500 driver on drm-next branch
won't compile for me. I have to apply the two patches that follow this
note to make it work.
The first is a trivial oversight, but the second makes me wonder whether
a stale driver was merged.
-- Ilija
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 09:13:56PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 01:14:00PM -0600, Rob Clark wrote:
> > btw, Inki, Daniel, Konrad, and everyone who's reviewed this driver
> > over the (what seems like) years, I'd appreciate r-b's or comments if
> > you think there is anythin
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 17:28, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> I've rebuilt my PRIME interface on top of dmabuf to see how it would work,
>>
>> I've got primed gears running again on top, but I expect all my object
>> lifetime and memory ownership rul
17 matches
Mail list logo