Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:32:48 -0400 Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote: On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700 Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200 Marc Deop i Argemí damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Arg, ok, I'll refresh them and post new ones tomorrow. Ok here are some updated ones. Running these patches on 2.6.35-rc3 (plus the brown-paper-bag TCP fix, plus my hotplug_mask hack, plus my CRT regression fix) with xf86-video-intel be55066c6481b4c5e2cd39ef1c0f3be88cae0c93 (which is about a day old) seems stable and I don't have any visible corruption. Just froze again. I moved my mouse and the screen turned black except for the mouse cursor and a little underscore in the top left that looked like the fbcon cursor. Again, magic sysrq didn't work, which I'd imagine would help narrow things down (presumably, no matter how hard the graphics hardware gets wedged, magic sysrq should still work). Yeah means the GMCH itself probably hung, possibly not responding to memory requests from the CPU. The display was otherwise idle when it froze? The behavior you describe sounds like a panic; there's a patch available to get some more info in that case: vt/console: try harder to print output when panicing that Dave Airlie just posted (attached). Can you apply it as well and see if you can reproduce the problem? Thanks, -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center [PATCH] vt_console: try harder to print output when panicing Description: Binary data ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 03:08 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva wrote: ...Snip bits of Xorg.0.log... [ 162.075] (EE) module ABI major version (7) doesn't match the server's version (9) [ 162.076] (II) UnloadModule: evdev You haven't rebuilt your input drivers against the new Xserver. The intel driver is working, X just doesn't have any input devices so it looks like it's frozen. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Lutomirski l...@mit.edu wrote: On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700 Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200 Marc Deop i Argemí damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Arg, ok, I'll refresh them and post new ones tomorrow. Ok here are some updated ones. Running these patches on 2.6.35-rc3 (plus the brown-paper-bag TCP fix, plus my hotplug_mask hack, plus my CRT regression fix) with xf86-video-intel be55066c6481b4c5e2cd39ef1c0f3be88cae0c93 (which is about a day old) seems stable and I don't have any visible corruption. Just froze again. I moved my mouse and the screen turned black except for the mouse cursor and a little underscore in the top left that looked like the fbcon cursor. Again, magic sysrq didn't work, which I'd imagine would help narrow things down (presumably, no matter how hard the graphics hardware gets wedged, magic sysrq should still work). --Andy That being said, if I rotate the screen, then typing becomes very annoyingly laggy. I have no idea whether that's a regression or not. --Andy -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700 Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200 Marc Deop i Argemí damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Arg, ok, I'll refresh them and post new ones tomorrow. Ok here are some updated ones. Running these patches on 2.6.35-rc3 (plus the brown-paper-bag TCP fix, plus my hotplug_mask hack, plus my CRT regression fix) with xf86-video-intel be55066c6481b4c5e2cd39ef1c0f3be88cae0c93 (which is about a day old) seems stable and I don't have any visible corruption. That being said, if I rotate the screen, then typing becomes very annoyingly laggy. I have no idea whether that's a regression or not. --Andy -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
2010/6/18 Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:34:43 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva tolkiend...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/6/15 Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org: Hello! I'm, maybe, getting the same thing here. I haven't tested the release candidate, but with Xorg 1.8 and driver 2.11, and a kms-enabled 2.6.34 kernel, using gentoo, X just freezes. If I downgrade it to 2.9 driver and 1.7 Xorg, it runs (but if I do USE=hal at Xorg, it freezes, too). Hi there, Elias! I did $ git checkout 2.9.0 $ ./autogen.sh --prefix=/opt/local/intel-gfx-2.9.0 (The version that actually worked here) Then $ make Making all in uxa CCuxa-render.o uxa-render.c: In function ‘uxa_acquire_pattern’: uxa-render.c:455: error: too few arguments to function ‘image_from_pict’ make[2]: *** [uxa-render.lo] Error 1 make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make: *** [all] Error 2 Maybe I need to follow the trick at http://old.nabble.com/Building-from-git-td27489808.html ? [ didn't worked; below my attemps ] The latest intel driver (at master) just compiled without issues. I have Xorg 1.8.1.901 installed right now. I installed git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/util/macros and did export ACLOCAL=aclocal -I /opt/local/xorg-macros/share/aclocal export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/opt/local/xorg-macros/lib/pkgconfig:/opt/local/xorg-macros/share/pkgconfig And tried again. It seems to be using the new vars during ./autogen.sh , because of this line: $ ./autogen.sh --prefix=/opt/local/intel-gfx-2.9.0 (..) autoreconf-2.65: running: aclocal -I /opt/local/xorg-macros/share/aclocal -I m4 (..) but still, same error $ make Making all in uxa CCuxa.o CCuxa-accel.o CCuxa-glyphs.o CCuxa-render.o uxa-render.c: In function 'uxa_acquire_pattern': uxa-render.c:455: error: too few arguments to function 'image_from_pict' make[2]: *** [uxa-render.lo] Error 1 make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make: *** [all] Error 2 Maybe I need an older version of this xorg-macros? I tried to copy /usr/share/aclocal/xorg-*.m4 to the m4 directory, too, that is the other workaround Chris Bagwell on that link says, but it didn't worked too; it seems to contain files from the to currently installed Xorg, and it looks like the right would be older files, relative to Xorg 1.7 I'm lost -- Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva tolkiend...@gmail.com ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Friday June 18 2010 22:04:50 Jesse Barnes wrote: Ok here are some updated ones. Already tried the patches. Now they both apply correctly on kernel 2.6.35-rc3. However, this is what I find on the Xorg.0.log: [ 463.790] (EE) intel(0): Detected a hung GPU, disabling acceleration. If I try to run glxgears the X window system crashes. This happens with both 2.11.0 and with 2.11.901RC However, I'm trying right now the kernel 2.6.35-rc3 with the 2.11.901 RC and, for now, it seems stable (I still get corruption if I try to rotate the screen as well as in some KDE menus). Regards -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:34:43 -0300, Elias Gabriel Amaral da Silva tolkiend...@gmail.com wrote: 2010/6/15 Carl Worth cwo...@cworth.org: Hello! I'm, maybe, getting the same thing here. I haven't tested the release candidate, but with Xorg 1.8 and driver 2.11, and a kms-enabled 2.6.34 kernel, using gentoo, X just freezes. If I downgrade it to 2.9 driver and 1.7 Xorg, it runs (but if I do USE=hal at Xorg, it freezes, too). Hi there, Elias! I have an Acer 532h (Intel GMA 3150, afaik). I've read your explanation on how to do git bisecting and it sounds easy. Good. It really should be quite simple. I should test with a fixed Xorg version, right? Which one? Portage currently has this: 1.6.5-r1 1.7.6 ~1.7.7 ~1.8.0 ~1.8.1-r1 Before you can bisect, you'll want to identify a single component that exposes the bug. Above you described a change of two components, (both X server and driver), to switch from a broken to a working configuration. So the first thing to do is to try keeping the X server version fixed and see if changing the driver alone changes the behavior. I haven't tried driver 2.9 with xorg 1.8, because I supposed newer xorg versions were incompatible with old drivers.. I'd actually recommend using the newer X in both cases. I would hope that new X would work fine with an older driver, (but there might be some point at which the driver really is *too old* for a particular X server). In that case, you might need to bump the driver version up and hope that it still works. Good luck! And thanks in advance for any future information you might be able to provide. -Carl -- carl.d.wo...@intel.com pgpJA9TCuoeDW.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 13:04:50 -0700 Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:44:10 -0700 Jesse Barnes jbar...@virtuousgeek.org wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200 Marc Deop i Argemí damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Arg, ok, I'll refresh them and post new ones tomorrow. Ok here are some updated ones. Btw these were against drm-intel-next from a few minutes ago. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Regards -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 02:20:23 +0200 Marc Deop i Argemí damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday June 18 2010 02:17:53 Andrew Lutomirski wrote: Neither patch applies for me. One of them do apply for me, the other one doesn't. Testing done on latest 2.6.35-rc3, the building fails. Arg, ok, I'll refresh them and post new ones tomorrow. Thanks, -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Wednesday June 16 2010 10:45:34 Marc Deop i Argemí wrote: Anyway, I will try to bisect today and report back :) Well, I tried. Does this message: Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps) [29ba8a84f7cf5c29a5f38688a1ac0ccf41d8e4ec] XvMC: everyone's using execbuffer! mean I finished the process? Did that help? Regards -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:10:35 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemà damnsh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wednesday June 16 2010 10:45:34 Marc Deop i Argemà wrote: Anyway, I will try to bisect today and report back :) Well, I tried. Does this message: Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps) [29ba8a84f7cf5c29a5f38688a1ac0ccf41d8e4ec] XvMC: everyone's using execbuffer! mean I finished the process? One more step. Test that commit and tell git bisect (good|bad) and it will print a slightly more verbose statement of which commit is triggering the freeze. Thanks, -ickle -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Wednesday June 16 2010 15:57:41 Chris Wilson wrote:
One more step. Test that commit and tell git bisect (good|bad) and it will
print a slightly more verbose statement of which commit is triggering the
freeze.
Sometimes I amaze myself :S It clearly says *after* this.
I'll do that tonight
However, I have to comment that the system has been stable with the 2.12RC for
two hours after applying this patch from my distribution (Archlinux):
diff -up xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/drmmode_display.c.no-flip xf86-video-
intel-2.11.0/src/drmmode_display.c
--- xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/drmmode_display.c.no-flip 2010-05-03
15:30:19.0 -0400
+++ xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/drmmode_display.c 2010-05-03
15:30:59.0 -0400
@@ -1504,10 +1504,15 @@ Bool drmmode_pre_init(ScrnInfoPtr scrn,
gp.value = has_flipping;
(void)drmCommandWriteRead(intel-drmSubFD, DRM_I915_GETPARAM, gp,
sizeof(gp));
+
+xf86DrvMsg(scrn-scrnIndex, X_INFO,
+ Pageflipping %s in kernel, %s disabled in X\n,
+ has_flipping ? enabled : disabled,
+ has_flipping ? but : and);
if (has_flipping) {
xf86DrvMsg(scrn-scrnIndex, X_INFO,
- Kernel page flipping support detected, enabling\n);
- intel-use_pageflipping = TRUE;
+ Don't panic: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/588421\n;);
+ intel-use_pageflipping = FALSE;
drmmode-flip_count = 0;
drmmode-event_context.version = DRM_EVENT_CONTEXT_VERSION;
drmmode-event_context.vblank_handler = drmmode_vblank_handler;
diff -up xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/i830_dri.c.no-flip xf86-video-
intel-2.11.0/src/i830_dri.c
--- xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/i830_dri.c.no-flip 2010-03-29
14:23:02.0 -0400
+++ xf86-video-intel-2.11.0/src/i830_dri.c 2010-05-03 15:30:19.0
-0400
@@ -1013,7 +1013,7 @@ Bool I830DRI2ScreenInit(ScreenPtr screen
info.CopyRegion = I830DRI2CopyRegion;
#if DRI2INFOREC_VERSION = 4
- if (intel-use_pageflipping) {
+ if (intel-use_pageflipping || 1) {
info.version = 4;
info.ScheduleSwap = I830DRI2ScheduleSwap;
info.GetMSC = I830DRI2GetMSC;
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
___
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 16:05:15 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote: On Tuesday June 15 2010 02:39:54 Carl Worth wrote: This is the first release candidate in preparation for the upcoming 2.12.0 release. We will appreciate any feedback we can get from testing of this snapshot to improve the 2.12.0 release. It makes my system really unstable. Sometimes I can't even login :S The system just freezes :( I'm running archlinux, Mesa 7.8.1, libdrm 2.4.21, Xorg-server 1.8.1.901, kernel 2.6.34. On what hw? Cheers, Julien ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Re: [Intel-gfx] [ANNOUNCE] xf86-video-intel 2.11.901
Hi Chris, That does indeed seem to have an effect on KDE -- can you confirm if it fixes the rendering corruption and if there remains any? With that change the corruptions seem to be gone. - Clemens ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
