From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: etienne Subject: Re: [Bug #12613] [Suspend regression][DRM, RADEON] Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:31:12 +0100 Message-ID: <49908480.6070408@numericable.fr> References: <498F5785.3000009@numericable.fr> <21d7e9970902081826r48777cb8s8c4e882a02575c71@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <21d7e9970902081826r48777cb8s8c4e882a02575c71-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Dave Airlie Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Dave Airlie , Dave Airlie , Soeren Sonnenburg Dave Airlie wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:07 AM, etienne wrote: > >> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report >>> of recent regressions. >>> >>> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions >>> from 2.6.28. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know >>> (either way). >>> >>> >>> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12613 >>> Subject : [Suspend regression][DRM, RADEON] >>> Submitter : etienne >>> Date : 2009-01-28 22:00 (12 days old) >>> First-Bad-Commit: >>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=a9d51a5ad1154b5b20add1e8d30a5564f8aabbe9 >>> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123318030419558&w=4 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123334865404574&w=4 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> hello, >> yes it's still present in -rc4 >> But I noticed that when I switch off KDE4.2 desktop effects, suspend to ram >> is 100% reliable with 2.6.29-rc4 >> With 2.6.28, STR is 100% reliable with or without desktop effects >> >> > > Hi Etienne, > > Can you try commenting out the calls to the radeon_suspend and > radeon_resume hooks in radeon_drv.c? > > Dave. > Hi Dave, I created the following "shot in the dark" patch that solves my problem! I looked at the change between 2.6.28 and .29rc, and only the radeon_cp.c:radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer changes stroke my eyes (cause it's called by radeon_cp_resume indirectedly) I don't understand what i did and how this works, but it works for me regards Etienne Signed-off-by: etienne diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c index 63212d7..fc6e134 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c @@ -557,7 +557,8 @@ static int radeon_do_engine_reset(struct drm_device * dev) } static void radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(struct drm_device * dev, - drm_radeon_private_t * dev_priv) + drm_radeon_private_t * dev_priv, + struct drm_radeon_master_private *master) { u32 ring_start, cur_read_ptr; u32 tmp; @@ -668,13 +669,13 @@ static void radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(struct drm_device * dev, RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_BUS_CNTL, tmp); } /* PCIE cards appears to not need this */ - dev_priv->scratch[0] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_frame = dev_priv->scratch[0] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_FRAME_REG, 0); - dev_priv->scratch[1] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_dispatch = dev_priv->scratch[1] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_DISPATCH_REG, 0); - dev_priv->scratch[2] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_clear = dev_priv->scratch[2] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_CLEAR_REG, 0); radeon_do_wait_for_idle(dev_priv); @@ -1215,7 +1216,7 @@ static int radeon_do_init_cp(struct drm_device *dev, drm_radeon_init_t *init, } radeon_cp_load_microcode(dev_priv); - radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv); + radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv, master_priv); dev_priv->last_buf = 0; @@ -1281,9 +1282,11 @@ static int radeon_do_cleanup_cp(struct drm_device * dev) * * Charl P. Botha */ -static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev) +static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev, + struct drm_file * file_priv) { drm_radeon_private_t *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; + struct drm_radeon_master_private * master_priv = file_priv->master->driver_priv; if (!dev_priv) { DRM_ERROR("Called with no initialization\n"); @@ -1304,7 +1307,7 @@ static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev) } radeon_cp_load_microcode(dev_priv); - radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv); + radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv, master_priv); radeon_do_engine_reset(dev); radeon_irq_set_state(dev, RADEON_SW_INT_ENABLE, 1); @@ -1480,7 +1483,7 @@ int radeon_cp_idle(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_pri int radeon_cp_resume(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv) { - return radeon_do_resume_cp(dev); + return radeon_do_resume_cp(dev, file_priv); } int radeon_engine_reset(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757197AbZBITba (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:31:30 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757020AbZBITbU (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:31:20 -0500 Received: from smtp5.tech.numericable.fr ([82.216.111.41]:51895 "EHLO smtp5.tech.numericable.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756983AbZBITbQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:31:16 -0500 Message-ID: <49908480.6070408@numericable.fr> Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:31:12 +0100 From: etienne User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Airlie CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Dave Airlie , Dave Airlie , Soeren Sonnenburg Subject: Re: [Bug #12613] [Suspend regression][DRM, RADEON] References: <498F5785.3000009@numericable.fr> <21d7e9970902081826r48777cb8s8c4e882a02575c71@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <21d7e9970902081826r48777cb8s8c4e882a02575c71@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Dave Airlie wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:07 AM, etienne wrote: > >> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> >>> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report >>> of recent regressions. >>> >>> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions >>> from 2.6.28. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know >>> (either way). >>> >>> >>> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12613 >>> Subject : [Suspend regression][DRM, RADEON] >>> Submitter : etienne >>> Date : 2009-01-28 22:00 (12 days old) >>> First-Bad-Commit: >>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=a9d51a5ad1154b5b20add1e8d30a5564f8aabbe9 >>> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123318030419558&w=4 >>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123334865404574&w=4 >>> >>> >>> >>> >> hello, >> yes it's still present in -rc4 >> But I noticed that when I switch off KDE4.2 desktop effects, suspend to ram >> is 100% reliable with 2.6.29-rc4 >> With 2.6.28, STR is 100% reliable with or without desktop effects >> >> > > Hi Etienne, > > Can you try commenting out the calls to the radeon_suspend and > radeon_resume hooks in radeon_drv.c? > > Dave. > Hi Dave, I created the following "shot in the dark" patch that solves my problem! I looked at the change between 2.6.28 and .29rc, and only the radeon_cp.c:radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer changes stroke my eyes (cause it's called by radeon_cp_resume indirectedly) I don't understand what i did and how this works, but it works for me regards Etienne Signed-off-by: etienne diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c index 63212d7..fc6e134 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_cp.c @@ -557,7 +557,8 @@ static int radeon_do_engine_reset(struct drm_device * dev) } static void radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(struct drm_device * dev, - drm_radeon_private_t * dev_priv) + drm_radeon_private_t * dev_priv, + struct drm_radeon_master_private *master) { u32 ring_start, cur_read_ptr; u32 tmp; @@ -668,13 +669,13 @@ static void radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(struct drm_device * dev, RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_BUS_CNTL, tmp); } /* PCIE cards appears to not need this */ - dev_priv->scratch[0] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_frame = dev_priv->scratch[0] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_FRAME_REG, 0); - dev_priv->scratch[1] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_dispatch = dev_priv->scratch[1] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_DISPATCH_REG, 0); - dev_priv->scratch[2] = 0; + master->sarea_priv->last_clear = dev_priv->scratch[2] = 0; RADEON_WRITE(RADEON_LAST_CLEAR_REG, 0); radeon_do_wait_for_idle(dev_priv); @@ -1215,7 +1216,7 @@ static int radeon_do_init_cp(struct drm_device *dev, drm_radeon_init_t *init, } radeon_cp_load_microcode(dev_priv); - radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv); + radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv, master_priv); dev_priv->last_buf = 0; @@ -1281,9 +1282,11 @@ static int radeon_do_cleanup_cp(struct drm_device * dev) * * Charl P. Botha */ -static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev) +static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev, + struct drm_file * file_priv) { drm_radeon_private_t *dev_priv = dev->dev_private; + struct drm_radeon_master_private * master_priv = file_priv->master->driver_priv; if (!dev_priv) { DRM_ERROR("Called with no initialization\n"); @@ -1304,7 +1307,7 @@ static int radeon_do_resume_cp(struct drm_device * dev) } radeon_cp_load_microcode(dev_priv); - radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv); + radeon_cp_init_ring_buffer(dev, dev_priv, master_priv); radeon_do_engine_reset(dev); radeon_irq_set_state(dev, RADEON_SW_INT_ENABLE, 1); @@ -1480,7 +1483,7 @@ int radeon_cp_idle(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_pri int radeon_cp_resume(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv) { - return radeon_do_resume_cp(dev); + return radeon_do_resume_cp(dev, file_priv); } int radeon_engine_reset(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *file_priv)