[pull] amdgpu drm-fixes-4.14

[Michel Dänzer]

On 13/10/17 10:19 AM, Christian König wrote:
> Am 13.10.2017 um 09:41 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
>> On 12/10/17 07:49 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:02 PM, Christian König
>>> <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Am 12.10.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
>>>>> On 12/10/17 05:58 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Dave,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One memory management regression fix.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following changes since commit
>>>>>> 545036a9944e9d6e50fed4ca03117147c880ff71:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Merge tag 'drm-misc-fixes-2017-10-11' of
>>>>>> git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc into drm-fixes (2017-10-12
>>>>>> 10:38:09 +1000)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     git://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux drm-fixes-4.14
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for you to fetch changes up to
>>>>>> 27b94b4f1386c3a8181f5a0277434a32e24e7dd7:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     drm/amdgpu: fix placement flags in amdgpu_ttm_bind (2017-10-12
>>>>>> 10:34:42 -0400)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Christian König (1):
>>>>>>         drm/amdgpu: fix placement flags in amdgpu_ttm_bind
>>>>> Thanks Alex, but there's another piglit hang regression in 4.14,
>>>>> caused
>>>>> by commit 6af0883ed977 "drm/amdgpu: discard commands of killed
>>>>> processes", fixed by five commits 6b37d03280a4..318d85de9c20 in
>>>>> amd-staging-drm-next. Either the latter need to be backported to 4.14,
>>>>> or the former needs to be reverted from it.
>>>>
>>>> The revert is probably easier to handle at this point.
>>>>
>>>> So to answer your question from the other thread I vote for that.
>>> Nicolai's patches apply cleanly and I think they change about the same
>>> amount of code and we don't have to worry about any problems down the
>>> road when the revert gets merged into drm-next.
>> That's basically why I asked which way to go. However, Monk just
>> reported a potential regression in one of Nicolai's changes, so
>> reverting seems safer for 4.14.
> 
> I agree that reverting the original offending patch is probably the
> better approach.

Alex, are you planning to send a pull request for the revert? Let me
know if there's anything I can do to help.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer               |               http://www.amd.com
Libre software enthusiast             |             Mesa and X developer