On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 02:45:43AM +0000, alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > [ Upstream commit 1be4d3793d5a93daddcd9be657c429b38ad750a3 ] > > The watermark should never exceed the FIFO size, so we need to > check against the current FIFO size instead of the theoretical > maximum when we clamp the level 0 watermark. > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1480354637-14209-4-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@xxxxxxxxxxx> Why are these patches being proposed for stable? They're not straight up fixes for known issues, and there's always a chance that something will break. Who is doing the qa on this? > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > index ad5649259e6a..12bc608833cf 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c > @@ -1129,13 +1129,13 @@ static void vlv_compute_wm(struct intel_crtc *crtc) > /* normal watermarks */ > for (level = 0; level < wm_state->num_levels; level++) { > int wm = vlv_compute_wm_level(plane, crtc, state, level); > - int max_wm = plane->base.type == DRM_PLANE_TYPE_CURSOR ? 63 : 511; > + int max_wm = plane->wm.fifo_size; > > /* hack */ > if (WARN_ON(level == 0 && wm > max_wm)) > wm = max_wm; > > - if (wm > plane->wm.fifo_size) > + if (wm > max_wm) > break; > > switch (plane->base.type) { > -- > 2.11.0 -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC