Re: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] drm/i915: tune down the fast link training vs boot fail" failed to apply to 4.9-stable tree

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 12:25:44PM +0100, koos vriezen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2017-01-08 15:50 GMT+01:00 Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 02:40:57PM +0100, koos vriezen wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Looks like "[PATCH] drm/i915: tune down the fast link training vs boot
> >> fail" is based on
> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c?id=d4cb3fd9b548b8bfe2a712ec920b9ebabd3547ab
> >>
> >> Combined I get this diff
> >>
> >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c        2017-01-08 14:37:01.443536926 +0100
> >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dp.c      2017-01-08 14:37:17.703138505 +0100
> >> @@ -4017,6 +4017,11 @@
> >>         if (!to_intel_crtc(intel_encoder->base.crtc)->active)
> >>                 return;
> >>
> >> +       /* FIXME: we need to synchronize this sort of stuff with hardware
> >> +        * readout. Currently fast link training doesn't work on boot-up. */
> >> +       if (!intel_dp->lane_count)
> >> +               return;
> >> +
> >>         /* if link training is requested we should perform it always */
> >>         if ((intel_dp->compliance_test_type == DP_TEST_LINK_TRAINING) ||
> >>             (!drm_dp_channel_eq_ok(link_status, intel_dp->lane_count))) {
> >>
> >>
> >
> > What does that mean, I should include the previous patch as well?
> > Please be specific, I have no short-term memory :)
> 
> Just compiled with both patches and see no problem. Judging the
> d4cb3fd9b548b8bfe2a712ec920b9ebabd3547ab commit description and commit
> date, I think yes. Added Ville Syrj�l� to judge whether stable should
> have that patch.

Ok, that looks good, I've queued up both of these patches now, thanks
for the help, much appreciated.

greg k-h