From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Slusarz Subject: Re: gpu lockup detection and fallback to noaccel Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:25:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20110619222554.GI4771@joi.lan> References: <20110614211859.GA3687@joi.lan> <1308119242.8806.1.camel@maxim-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1308119242.8806.1.camel@maxim-laptop> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: nouveau-bounces+gcfxn-nouveau=m.gmane.org-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org Errors-To: nouveau-bounces+gcfxn-nouveau=m.gmane.org-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org To: Maxim Levitsky Cc: nouveau-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org List-Id: nouveau.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 09:27:22AM +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 23:18 +0200, Marcin Slusarz wrote: > > Hi > > > > I have a very rough patchset which adds support for GPU lockup detection and fallback > > to (more or less) noaccel to xf86-video-nouveau. > > > > As the patches are only a proof of concept and needs a lot of work, I would like > > to know first if this is a desired feature - I don't want to spend a couple of days > > on patches which will be ignored or rejected with a reason "we don't need it". > > > > So, what do you think? > > Will love it! I have unexplained hangs here, so maybe I could debug them > further with this. > Thanks for encouragement. But... I was hoping for reponse from someone with commit access. I really really hate wasting time, so I'm not going to finish it. Oh well, I guess it's not that important as I thought. Marcin