On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:37:44PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Jani Nikula >> <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jani Nikula >> >>> <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>> On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>>>>> Hi all, >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Changes since 20130724: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Removed tree: >> >>>>>> arm-dt (at maintainer's request) >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The wireless-next tree lost its build failure and gained a conflict >> >>>>>> against Linus' tree. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The tty tree lost its build failure. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> The staging tree gained a build failure for which I disabled a driver. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >>>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [ CCing drm and drm-intel folks ] >> >>>>> >> >>>>> With today's next-20130725 I see the following: >> >>>> >> >>>> Use of dev_priv->gt_lock in I915_WRITE through >> >>>> intel_disable_gt_powersave before spin lock init, caused by >> >>>> >> >>>> commit 181d1b9e31c668259d3798c521672afb8edd355c >> >>>> Author: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> >> >>>> Date: Sun Jul 21 13:16:24 2013 +0200 >> >>>> >> >>>> drm/i915: fix up gt init sequence fallout >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> Ah, cool. >> >>> >> >>> I assumed/tested "drm/i915: fix the racy object accounting", but this >> >>> does not fix it. >> >>> Will try with yours. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Sorry, Jani. >> >> >> >> next-20130725 ships the patch you pointed, too. >> > >> > Confused. I meant that the above mentioned commit "drm/i915: fix up gt >> > init sequence fallout" causes the problem. The patch I included in my >> > mail should fix it. Could you try that please? >> > >> >> [ Note2myself: Do not read half of the message... ] >> >> The bad... Your patch needed some refresh against next-20130725 (guess >> it's against drm-intel-nightly). >> >> The good... YES, your patch fixes the issue for me! >> >> The ugly... /me. >> >> Feel free to add my: >> >> Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Thanks for the quick fix! > > Thanks a lot for the report, since this should be something I should have > caught. And for added insult the offending patch is already in Linus' tree > :( Patch merged to -fixes. Hmmm, don't you merge -fixes into -nightly? - Sedat - > -Daniel > -- > Daniel Vetter > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation > +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
