On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 03:59:36PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote: > Poke: still wondering what we should do about the patch in these fixes that > came up a little later which got Cc'd to stable, despite it apparently not > being a patch we want in stable (mentioned this over IRC): > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/255428/ and > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/50770/ Thanks for bringing this up. So, These 2 patches are merged on the tree, but we don't want them propagated to stable tree anymore? Do we have a fix for those? Or are we reverting them? We probably want to raise this up to Greg so he doesn't pick them when running his stable scripts. But also I was wondering another aspect of these patches I had here on this dropped list. In the end most of patches that was here will be picked by Greg's stable scripts anyways. Also other patches with cc:stable that were on that round but got removed: commit 1e712535c51a ("drm/i915/dp: Link train Fallback on eDP only if fallback link BW can fit panel's native mode") commit 62358aa4ee86 ("drm/i915: Use the correct crtc when sanitizing plane mapping") commit 68bc30deac62 ("drm/i915: Restore vblank interrupts earlier") Should I add back at least these patches this week? Or we should really wait for 4.19 to be released? Thanks, Rodrigo. > > On Thu, 2018-10-11 at 09:17 +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. > > > > Dave. > -- > Cheers, > Lyude Paul > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
