Here's a pile of new code for the 3.2 series.
Overview:
* 3 pipe support for IVB.
* eDP fixes for SNB
* Interrupt race condition fixes
* Switch from MI_FLUSH to PIPECONTROL
* VT-d work-around for ILK
The following changes since commit 0ac225e56997ef89f46eb51b02799a685b78f214:
Merge
Hi Keith,
This patch hasn't shown up in your -next pull request. Please consider
merging for 3.2.
Yours, Daniel
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:02:58PM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On 10/11/11 11:27 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
ajax i'm getting tempted to just disable temporal
mjg59 Approved.
ajax
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:58:22AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Sun, 9 Oct 2011 21:52:01 +0200
Daniel Vetter daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch wrote:
So don't forget to restore them on resume and dump them into
the error state.
This should probably just be = 6 instead; I don't think we're
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull request. Please consider merging for
3.2.
Yours, Daniel
On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 11:32:34PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 11:44:54AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
Some more unsafe debugfs access are fixed with this patch. I
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull. This papers over a spurious -EFAULT
in the pwrite/pread paths that actually gets hit in the wild. The real fix
in the form of a almost complete rewrite of the pwrite/pread paths won't
be ready for 3.2.
Do you want me to implement Chris'
Oosp, forgotten to actually put Keith on the To: ... not enough coffee,
yet.
-Daniel
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:18:30PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull. This papers over a spurious -EFAULT
in the pwrite/pread paths that actually gets hit in the wild.
Regardless of the outcome of Jesse's request for an if-ladder, the
substance of the patches look sound.
However, I remain unconvinced that there are 32 fence registers on IVB.
Daniel's evidence is based upon the size of the register map (and not
on the BSPEC explicitly stating a change to 32 ;-),
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:23:14PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
Regardless of the outcome of Jesse's request for an if-ladder, the
substance of the patches look sound.
However, I remain unconvinced that there are 32 fence registers on IVB.
Daniel's evidence is based upon the size of the
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 14:09:07 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Keith, can take a look at patches 1-2 and consider merging them for 3.2?
Those two are
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:03:32 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch hasn't shown up in your -next pull request. Please consider
merging for 3.2.
So small I missed it? I'll send it in the next set after Dave merges
what I've posted so far.
--
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:13:43 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull request. Please consider merging for
3.2.
I didn't ever see a reply from Nicolas that it fixed his problem; would
be nice to know whether this actually worked...
--
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:18:30 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull. This papers over a spurious -EFAULT
in the pwrite/pread paths that actually gets hit in the wild. The real fix
in the form of a almost complete rewrite of the pwrite/pread
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:21:38 -0700
Keith Packard kei...@keithp.com wrote:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:13:43 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull request. Please consider merging for
3.2.
I didn't ever see a reply from Nicolas that it
Keith, I believe this series belongs in -next. The first two could
actually go in fixes.
Ben
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 19:41:23 -0700
Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
After my refactoring, Chris noticed that we had a bug.
dev_priv keeps track of the current addressing mode that gets set at
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:23:47PM -0700, Keith Packard wrote:
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 12:18:30 +0200, Daniel Vetter dan...@ffwll.ch wrote:
Hi Keith,
This patch isn't in your -next pull. This papers over a spurious -EFAULT
in the pwrite/pread paths that actually gets hit in the wild. The
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 01:45:21PM -0700, Kenneth Graunke wrote:
On 10/23/2011 04:23 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
Regardless of the outcome of Jesse's request for an if-ladder, the
substance of the patches look sound.
However, I remain unconvinced that there are 32 fence registers on IVB.
Hello,
I'm running wow in wine on 64 bit fedora rawhide on a dell vostro 3550
(i5 with integrated GPU).
I'm reliably able to produce 2 types of crashes:
- wow freezes, but I can get to text console, in this case I'm able to
grab a kernel stack trace (below) prior to seeing the normal
17 matches
Mail list logo
