On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 02:12:10PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 27 Aug 2014, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > A bunch of warnings fire on some ->irq_postinstall hooks since those > > can enable interrupts (e.g. rps interrupts). And then our ordering > > self-checks fire and complain. > > > > To fix that set the tracking boolen before enabling the irqs witho > > drm_irq_install. Quoting the discussion with Jesse why that's safe: > > Yi Sun's testing result needs to be addressed one way or another before > merging this: > > http://mid.gmane.org/D9F66AA509623343B6A9A3D4502D5A52112B0676@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shrug it off as an unstable test result. Both mine and Jesse's patch really only change the logic we use to WARN about interrupt state. We don't use pm._irqs_disabled for anything else at all. Which means that black screen is at most a timing issue. Or the baseline kernels don't perfectly match (the new warning in Jesse's patch is a bit an indicator for that). -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
