<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body><a class="email" href="mailto:jani.nikula@intel.com" title="Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>"> Jani Nikula</a> changed <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - [PATCH] Fix_stuck_on_bsd_ring for Clarkdale/Ironlake and kernel 4.4.x" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99737">bug 99737</a> <table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="8"> <tr> <th>What</th> <th>Removed</th> <th>Added</th> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:right;">Status</td> <td>NEW </td> <td>RESOLVED </td> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:right;">Resolution</td> <td>--- </td> <td>WONTFIX </td> </tr></table> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - [PATCH] Fix_stuck_on_bsd_ring for Clarkdale/Ironlake and kernel 4.4.x" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99737#c7">Comment # 7</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED WONTFIX - [PATCH] Fix_stuck_on_bsd_ring for Clarkdale/Ironlake and kernel 4.4.x" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99737">bug 99737</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:jani.nikula@intel.com" title="Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>"> Jani Nikula</a> <pre>(In reply to Rainer Fiebig from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=99737#c6">comment #6</a>) > Alright, then it won't get fixed. The a/m 2 committs cannot be backported > easily, the differences between 4.7/4.8 and 4.4 are too big. The patch is > 500 lines for a reason. That doesn't mean that it cannot be compressed down > to 100 lines. You i915-devs surely can but I can't. The rule is about picking upstream commits that conform to the rules, not about picking any commits and condensing them to fit the rules. > Not trivial but not impossible either. If *I* as average user could analyze > the problem, find the 2 committs, solve the puzzle between vastly apart > kernels and come up with a patch despite huge differences in code, any of > you experienced i915-devs should be able to check and improve that patch > with significantly less effort and time than it took me to produce it. The reality is that we'd have to consider several *other* generations of hardware with varying configurations, not just your hardware. I'm sorry, but the risk of non-trivial backports breaking stuff in stable is not to be taken lightly. I understand you are not happy with the situation, I would not be happy in your situation, but a stable backport breaking a system is a much worse scenario. And then factor in that we're all looking at v4.12, and moving to v4.13 within the week. I'll be honest with you, backporting a fix to v4.4 is not interesting or a priority. > I wouldn't mind if you closed this well-intentioned but obviously ill-placed > report. Thanks, will do, and apologies we couldn't help you.</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>