[Intel-gfx] Mismatch in gmch_pfit.lvds_border_bits on EeePC 900

[Daniel Vetter]

If I'm matching bugs correctly then yeah, we just reverted the
offending commit. But only in drm-intel-fixes. Sorry that I dropped
the ball on this. And please ping with mailing lists still on cc.
-Daniel

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe at gmail.com> wrote:
> (also resending to daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch)
>
> On 18 July 2014 18:24, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 21 June 2014 04:33, Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 03:30:12PM +0100, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 11:32:29AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Not in the resend and I didn't seem to receive your original mail somehow
>>>> > at all. Can you please resend.
>>>>
>>>> Downloadable from http://sucs.org/~sits/test/eeepc-900/dmesg-20140611 .
>>>>
>>>> By the way, Mutt seems to be becoming upset when I group reply to your
>>>> mails. I think it's because your address is in both the To: and the Cc:
>>>> fields....
>>>>
>>>> > > > > Also, do you have any ideas when you reproduce this? Anything that changes
>>>> > > > > the lvds output could be relevant ...
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Doing
>>>> > > > xrandr -s 800x600
>>>> > > > xrandr -s 0
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > was enough to provoke the messages in the attached log.
>>>> >
>>>> > Ok, makes sense. Smells a bit like leftover pfit state. Can you please
>>>> > also try latest drm-intel-nightly?
>>>>
>>>> The previous log is from drm-intel-nightly but there seem to be more
>>>> warnings in it rather than less...
>>>
>>> Just checking - did you get the previous mail (above) saying where the
>>> log was?
>>
>> Did this one get fixed (I never heard back)? If so I can test a newer kernel...
>>
>> --
>> Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/
>
>
>
> --
> Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/



-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch