On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:26:32 +0100, Saarinen, Jani wrote: > > Hi, > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:tiwai@xxxxxxx] > > Sent: tiistai 13. helmikuuta 2018 10.14 > > To: Saarinen, Jani <jani.saarinen@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > Kumar, Abhijeet <abhijeet.kumar@xxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] AWOOGA: Revert "ALSA: hda: Make use of core > > codec functions to sync power state" > > > > On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:34:40 +0100, > > Saarinen, Jani wrote: > > > > > > HI, > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Intel-gfx [mailto:intel-gfx-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On > > > > Behalf Of Takashi Iwai > > > > Sent: tiistai 13. helmikuuta 2018 7.11 > > > > To: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Kumar, Abhijeet > > > > <abhijeet.kumar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] AWOOGA: Revert "ALSA: hda: Make use > > > > of core codec functions to sync power state" > > > > > > > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:29:53 +0100, > > > > Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit 3b5b899ca67db07a4c4825911072221f99e157e2. > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 3b5b899ca67d ("ALSA: hda: Make use of core codec functions > > > > > to sync power state") > > > > > Cc: Abhijeet Kumar <abhijeet.kumar@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Did the patch break anything? > > > > I don't understand it without any real context... > > > Yes. See resutls from link what is fixed by reverting: > > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/38097/ > > > Test pm_rpm: > > > Subgroup basic-pci-d3-state: > > > fail -> PASS (fi-hsw-4770) > > > fail -> PASS (fi-bdw-5557u) > > > Subgroup basic-rte: > > > fail -> PASS (fi-hsw-4770) > > > fail -> PASS (fi-bdw-5557u) > > > > Could you investigate why does the revert fix? > Maybe you instead. Once when a proper bug report is sent to us upstream :) > > Two functions are almost identical. The difference is that the new one has a > > counter and quit at 500 iteration, and it has a msleep(200) at the error exit. But > > both shouldn't matter for the normal operation... > > > > FWIW, below is the patch to make the new function identical with the original > > function. Does it change the behavior? > > > Just send it for ml so that CI can test. I guess Abhijeet can manage it better. It's Intel stuff, after all. Takashi _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
