On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 13, 2023 at 03:41:30PM +0200, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > Hi, > >> On 11.08.23 20:10, Mikhail Rudenko wrote: >> > On 2023-08-11 at 08:45 +02, Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 10.08.23 21:33, Mikhail Rudenko wrote: >> >>> The following is a copy an issue I posted to drm/i915 gitlab [1] two >> >>> months ago. I repost it to the mailing lists in hope that it will help >> >>> the right people pay attention to it. >> >> >> >> Thx for your report. Wonder why Dmitry (who authored a4e771729a51) or >> >> Thomas (who committed it) it didn't look into this, but maybe the i915 >> >> devs didn't forward the report to them. >> >> For the record: they did, and Jani mentioned already. Sorry, should have >> phrased this differently. >> >> >> Let's see if these mails help. Just wondering: does reverting >> >> a4e771729a51 from 6.5-rc5 or drm-tip help as well? >> > >> > I've redone my tests with 6.5-rc5, and here are the results: >> > (1) 6.5-rc5 -> still affected >> > (2) 6.5-rc5 + revert a4e771729a51 -> not affected >> > (3) 6.5-rc5 + two patches [1][2] suggested on i915 gitlab by @ideak -> not affected (!) >> > >> > Should we somehow tell regzbot about (3)? >> >> That's good to know, thx. But the more important things are: >> >> * When will those be merged? They are not yet in next yet afaics, so it >> might take some time to mainline them, especially at this point of the >> devel cycle. Imre, could you try to prod the right people so that these >> are ideally upstreamed rather sooner than later, as they fix a regression? > > I think the patches ([1] and [2]) could be merged via the drm-intel-next > (drm-intel-fixes) tree Cc'ing also stable. Jani, is this ok? It's fine by me, but need drm-misc maintainer ack to merge [1] via drm-intel. BR, Jani. > >> * They if possible ideally should be tagged for backporting to 6.4, as >> this is a regression from the 6.3 cycle. >> >> But yes, let's tell regzbot that fixes are available, too: >> >> #regzbot fix: drm/i915: Fix HPD polling, reenabling the output poll work >> as needed >> >> (for the record: that's the second of two patches apparently needed) >> >> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) >> -- >> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking: >> https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr >> If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page. >> >> >> BTW, there was an earlier report about a problem with a4e771729a51 that >> >> afaics was never addressed, but it might be unrelated. >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230328023129.3596968-1-zhouzongmin@xxxxxxxxxx/ >> > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/548590/?series=121050&rev=1 >> > [2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/548591/?series=121050&rev=1 >> -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
