On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:22:58AM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > [ Re: i915 producing warnings with kernel 3.11-rc5 ] > > Hi, > > saw your posting in [1]... can you try the patches below? > Not sure if they apply. > Did you try v3.11-rc6(+)... or drm-intel-nightly? > > Regards, > - Sedat - > > [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2013-August/032154.html Same thing observed with v3.11-rc7. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 7:31 AM > Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 1 [ drm-intel-next: Several call-traces ] > To: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > Cc: "Barnes, Jesse" <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephen Rothwell > <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-next <linux-next@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux > Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, intel-gfx > <intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, DRI > <dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> Changes since 20130628: > >>>> > >>>> The regulator tree gained a build failure so I used the version from > >>>> next-20130628. > >>>> > >>>> The trivial tree gained a conflict against the fbdev tree. > >>>> > >>>> The arm-soc tree gained a conflict against the net-next tree. > >>>> > >>>> The akpm tree lost a few patches that turned up elsewhere and I removed 2 > >>>> that were causing run time problems. > >>>> > >>> > >>> [ CC drm and drm-intel folks ] > >>> > >>> [ Did not check any relevant MLs ] > >>> > >>> Please, see attached dmesg output. > >> > >> Clock mismatch, one for Jesse to figure out. Note that this patch is > >> for 3.12, I simply haven't yet gotten around to properly split my > >> patch queue so a few spilled into -next. I'll do that now. > > > > I like lightspeed-fast replies :-). > > > > Guess "drm/i915: get mode clock when reading the pipe config v9" [1] > > is the cause. > > > > Problem solved by applying these patches to next-20130701 from > intel-gfx patchwork-service [0]: > > [1/2] drm/i915: fixup messages in pipe_config_compare > [2/2] drm/i915: get clock config when checking CRTC state too > > AFAICS 2/2 was folded into updated "drm/i915: get mode clock when > reading the pipe config v9" [3]. > > It would be kind to be CCed on the patches and get also some credits. > Also a CC to the report in linux-next should IMHO be done. > > - Sedat - > > [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/intel-gfx/list/ > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2809031/ > [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2809021/ > [3] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-nightly&id=f1f644dc66cbaf5a4c7dcde683361536b41885b9 > > > - Sedat - > > > > [1] http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~danvet/drm-intel/commit/?h=drm-intel-next-queued&id=d325d8b4f351f9d45e7c8baabf581fd21f343133 > > > >> -Daniel > >> -- > >> Daniel Vetter > >> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > >> +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
