On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 4:14 PM Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi > > Am 04.12.19 um 10:36 schrieb Dave Airlie: > > On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 17:30, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi John > >> > >> Am 03.12.19 um 18:55 schrieb John Donnelly: > >>> Hi , > >>> > >>> See below , > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Nov 26, 2019, at 3:50 AM, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi > >>>> > >>>> Am 26.11.19 um 10:37 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > >>>>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 08:25:44AM +0100, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > >>>>>> There's at least one system that does not interpret the value of > >>>>>> the device's 'startadd' field correctly, which leads to incorrectly > >>>>>> displayed scanout buffers. Always placing the active scanout buffer > >>>>>> at offset 0 works around the problem. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Reported-by: John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/misc/issues/7 > >>>>> > >>>>> Tested-by: John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> > >>>>> (Not quite this patch, but pretty much the logic, so counts). > >>>>> > >>>>> Fixes: 81da87f63a1e ("drm: Replace drm_gem_vram_push_to_system() with kunmap + unpin") > >>>>> Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v5.3+ > >>>>> > >>>>> Also you need the stable line on both prep patches too. For next time > >>>>> around, > >>>>> > >>>>> $ dim fixes 81da87f63a1e > >>>>> > >>>>> will generate all the stuff you need, including a good set of suggested > >>>>> Cc: you should have. > >>>>> > >>>>> On the first 3 patches, with all that stuff added: > >>>>> > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for the review. > >>>> > >>>> Sorry for leaving out some of the tags. I wanted to wait for feedback > >>>> before adding tested-by, fixes, stable. I'll split off patch 4 from the > >>>> series and get 1 to 3 merged ASAP. > >>>> > >>>> Best regards > >>>> Thomas > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Please push these to drm-misc-next-fixes so they get backported as quickly > >>>>> as possible. > >>>>> -Daniel > >>>>> > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > >>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.h | 3 +++ > >>>>>> 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c > >>>>>> index 397f8b0a9af8..d43951caeea0 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c > >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mgag200/mgag200_drv.c > >>>>>> @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ module_param_named(modeset, mgag200_modeset, int, 0400); > >>>>>> static struct drm_driver driver; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> static const struct pci_device_id pciidlist[] = { > >>>>>> + { PCI_VENDOR_ID_MATROX, 0x522, PCI_VENDOR_ID_SUN, 0x4852, 0, 0, > >>>>>> + G200_SE_A | MGAG200_FLAG_HW_BUG_NO_STARTADD}, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> I will have an additional list of vendor IDs (0x4852) I will provide in a follow up patch shortly . This fixes only 1 flavor of server. > >> > >> Thank you for all the testing you do. We can add these ids as necessary. > >> > >> Before, I posted a patch at [1] that prints an internal unique id. The > >> id of your original test machine was 0x2 IIRC. > >> > >> My guess is that the problem might be related to the chip's revision. If > >> you have the option of booting your own kernels on all these machines, > >> could you apply the patch and look for a pattern in these ids? Maybe > >> only revision 0x2 is affected. > >> > > > > I've got an old bug I never got around to that has a comment from Matrox > > > > "The issue is reproducible with G200e chip. The device ID is 0x0522." > > > > so it might be a broader problem than we think. > > Did they tell you a subvendor id? John reported that the internal > revision id differs among affected machines. I'm thinking about flagging > either Sun devices or all 0x0522 devices as broken. Well it was from Matrox themselves, so they are the vendor ID, it didn't sounds like subvendor mattered, though I expect the problem is the BMC firmware anyways, not sure if we can even know what ths is. Dave. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
