<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" /> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - [nouveau, nv50] linux 3.9.7-3.10.3: Xorg won't be available" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67382#c32">Comment # 32</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW --- - [nouveau, nv50] linux 3.9.7-3.10.3: Xorg won't be available" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67382">bug 67382</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:martin.peres@ensi-bourges.fr" title="Martin Peres <martin.peres@ensi-bourges.fr>"> Martin Peres</a> <pre>(In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=67382#c31">comment #31</a>) > (In reply to <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=67382#c30">comment #30</a>) > > As the days went by. I'm wondering what I should do. Or what's the case with > > this report. > > Is it kind of a problem, that I need to take care myself? E.g. it cannot be > > patched/removed/altered, because this stabilisation is needed and would harm > > other cards? > > > Point is I've asked a few people and no-one seems to have such issue like > you. So I'm suspecting that it's related to the original NV50. With that > said the only person I can think of having such a card to test is the > nouveau/kernel maintainer. Which is quite busy, but hopefully will have a > moment to test. > > Side effect of using the new "fix" is causing a regression on almost all > other cards, and/or the need to increase the delay to a silly value (as it > was before). Hey dude, I have two of them :) One quadro and one geforce.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>