On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 09:17:52AM +1000, David Airlie wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 8:53 AM Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I need your help to decide what to do with this round of fixes.
> >
> > I have collected these patches this week:
> >
> > commit b43e8916172a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode")
> > commit 5abb01e541ed ("drm/i915: Fix intel_dp_mst_best_encoder()")
> > commit 02713246296d ("drm/i915: Skip vcpi allocation for MSTB ports that are gone")
> > commit cc6e027f5f50 ("drm/i915: Don't unset intel_connector->mst_port")
> > commit f5aec50ba21e ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping")
> > commit 6547684bf50a ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier")
> >
> > CI_DIF_309 represents Greg's v4.19-rc7 and it is clean.
> >
> > However 2 following CI runs are kind of strange.
> >
> > There's few underruns here and there, but those looks flip-flops.
> >
> > My biggest concern is specially around:
> >
> > igt@kms_plane@pixel-format-pipe-a-planes:
> > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/shards.html
> >
> > https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-intel-fixes/CI_DIF_311/shard-glk8/igt@kms_plane@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > I'm holding the pull request for now and will try to do some local tests here
> > to see if I can identify a culprit.
>
> At this late in the game for rc8, unless these fix a major regression
> in the current tree, I'd say drop them until -next.
>
I am okay with that w.r.t my patch ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode")
Manasi
> Dave.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
