[pull] amdgpu drm-fixes-4.14

[Deucher, Alexander]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Dänzer [mailto:michel at daenzer.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 12:06 PM
> To: Koenig, Christian; Alex Deucher
> Cc: Deucher, Alexander; Dave Airlie; amd-gfx list; Maling list - DRI developers
> Subject: Re: [pull] amdgpu drm-fixes-4.14
> 
> 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.


Yeah, I'll send it out shortly.

Alex

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