Fwd: linux-next: Tree for Jul 1 [ drm-intel-next: Several call-traces ]

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:22:58AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> [ Re: [Intel-gfx] i915 producing warnings with kernel 3.11-rc5 ]
> 
> Hi,
> 
> saw your posting in [1]... can you try the patches below?
> Not sure if they apply.
> Did you try v3.11-rc6(+)... or drm-intel-nightly?
> 
> Regards,
> - Sedat -
> 
> [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2013-August/032154.html

Same thing observed with v3.11-rc7.


> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 7:31 AM
> Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 1 [ drm-intel-next: Several call-traces ]
> To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
> Cc: "Barnes, Jesse" <jbarnes at virtuousgeek.org>, Stephen Rothwell
> <sfr at canb.auug.org.au>, linux-next <linux-next at vger.kernel.org>, Linux
> Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org>, intel-gfx
> <intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org>, DRI
> <dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org>, Dave Airlie <airlied at gmail.com>
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr at canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> Changes since 20130628:
> >>>>
> >>>> The regulator tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
> >>>> next-20130628.
> >>>>
> >>>> The trivial tree gained a conflict against the fbdev tree.
> >>>>
> >>>> The arm-soc tree gained a conflict against the net-next tree.
> >>>>
> >>>> The akpm tree lost a few patches that turned up elsewhere and I removed 2
> >>>> that were causing run time problems.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> [ CC drm and drm-intel folks ]
> >>>
> >>> [ Did not check any relevant MLs ]
> >>>
> >>> Please, see attached dmesg output.
> >>
> >> Clock mismatch, one for Jesse to figure out. Note that this patch is
> >> for 3.12, I simply haven't yet gotten around to properly split my
> >> patch queue so a few spilled into -next. I'll do that now.
> >
> > I like lightspeed-fast replies :-).
> >
> > Guess "drm/i915: get mode clock when reading the pipe config v9" [1]
> > is the cause.
> >
> 
> Problem solved by applying these patches to next-20130701 from
> intel-gfx patchwork-service [0]:
> 
>    [1/2] drm/i915: fixup messages in pipe_config_compare
>    [2/2] drm/i915: get clock config when checking CRTC state too
> 
> AFAICS 2/2 was folded into updated "drm/i915: get mode clock when
> reading the pipe config v9" [3].
> 
> It would be kind to be CCed on the patches and get also some credits.
> Also a CC to the report in linux-next should IMHO be done.
> 
> - Sedat -
> 
> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/intel-gfx/list/
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2809031/
> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2809021/
> [3] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-nightly&id=f1f644dc66cbaf5a4c7dcde683361536b41885b9
> 
> > - Sedat -
> >
> > [1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-next-queued&id=d325d8b4f351f9d45e7c8baabf581fd21f343133
> >
> >> -Daniel
> >> --
> >> Daniel Vetter
> >> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> >> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch