Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: fix regression on CIK (v2)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:21 AM, Christian König
<christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am 10.04.2016 um 18:22 schrieb Greg KH:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:31:30PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 04:14:30PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 03:48:18PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Grigori Goronzy <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This fix was written against drm-next, but when it was
>>>>>>> backported to 4.5 as a stable fix, the driver internal
>>>>>>> structure change was missed.  Fix that up here to avoid
>>>>>>> a hang due to waiting for the wrong sequence number.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> v2: agd: fix up commit message
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Grigori Goronzy <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Greg,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The code is correct for 4.6, this fix should be applied to
>>>>>>> 4.5 and older stable kernels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the patch in 4.6 that made it "correct"?  I would much rather
>>>>>> take that than something else.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's correct as is for 4.6.  I cherry-picked it out of my drm-next
>>>>> tree into 4.5 since it was a bug fix, but missed the internal driver
>>>>> structure change in drm-next that was not in 4.5.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry, I don't understand at all what you mean here :(
>>>>
>>>> What changed between 4.5.0 and 4.6-rc1 that made 4.5 "broken"?  What
>>>> fixed it in 4.6-rc1?
>>>
>>> The patch was written and tested against drm-next, but I cherry-picked
>>> it to 4.5 as is since it was a bug fix.  However, I missed the
>>> internal driver structure change that it depended on.  Now that
>>> drm-next has been merged into 4.6 (including the driver structure
>>> change), the code from 4.5 works fine.  However 4.5 and older kernels
>>> are broken since they don't have the changes for 4.6.
>>
>> I still don't understand.  What is the commit in Linus's tree that
>> matches this change?  Why can't I just cherry-pick that patch instead of
>> this "custom" one?
>
>
> The change in Linus tree this bug fix was based on is the improvement of the
> sequence handling and removal of hardware semaphores I did for 4.6. And
> those two new features in turn are based on the introduction of the GPU
> scheduler earlier in the 4.6 cycle.
>
> In total I think you would need to cherry pick something between 30 and 50
> patches to get to the same state and none of them are bug fixes which should
> go into 4.5 or older kernels.
>
> So Alex and Grigori's argumentation is valid that this should be fixed by
> this custom single line change instead of backporting everything it's based
> upon.
>
> Sorry for not being clear about this,
> Christian.

Greg is there any chance this could be applied?

Alex

>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> greg k-h
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]