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@xxxxxxxxx> 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.
Regards,
Christian.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
