On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:31:15PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 01:28 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> > > Patch mostly looks good to me, one comment below
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 00:24 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
>
On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 01:28 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> > Patch mostly looks good to me, one comment below
> >
> > On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 00:24 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > > Fix the breakage resulting in the stacktrace below, due to tx que
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:09:56PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
> Patch mostly looks good to me, one comment below
>
> On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 00:24 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > Fix the breakage resulting in the stacktrace below, due to tx queue
> > being full when trying to send an up-reply. txmsg->seqn
Patch mostly looks good to me, one comment below
On Fri, 2019-05-24 at 00:24 +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> Fix the breakage resulting in the stacktrace below, due to tx queue
> being full when trying to send an up-reply. txmsg->seqno is -1 in this
> case leading to a corruption of the mstb object by
>
Fix the breakage resulting in the stacktrace below, due to tx queue
being full when trying to send an up-reply. txmsg->seqno is -1 in this
case leading to a corruption of the mstb object by
txmsg->dst->tx_slots[txmsg->seqno] = NULL;
in process_single_up_tx_qlock().
[ +0,005162] [drm:pro
