Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Restore all GGTT VMAs on resume

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 10:45:23AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> 
> On 07/08/2015 10:32 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 04:19:01PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 03:15:01PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> >>>From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >>>
> >>>When rotated and partial views were added no one spotted the resume
> >>>path which assumes only one GGTT VMA per object and hence is now
> >>>skipping rebind of alternative views.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> >>>Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> >>>Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>>Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> >>>---
> >>>Similarly to my recent debugfs patch, it would seem quicker path could
> >>>be to walk GGTT active & inactive lists, but I assume we want to call
> >>>i915_gem_clflush_object only once per object which would make that
> >>>problematic.
> >
> >Patch is missing offending commit that introduce this issue and which
> >platforms are affected (I guess all due to partial view?). Also should be
> >cc: stable I presume?
> >
> >Can you please supply this so I can ammend the commit message? Applied to
> >-fixes meanwhile, thanks.
> 
> Ha, "offending" commits. In the sense of that the bug only manifests
> when they are present they are either of these two:
> 
> commit c5ad54cf7dd8922bd1cee2d5871aebf73dc9638e
> Author: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> Date:   Wed May 6 14:36:09 2015 +0300
> 
>     drm/i915: Use partial view in mmap fault handler
> 
> commit 3b7a5119b5d2def1161226a4c6a643db537dff7e
> Author: Sonika Jindal <sonika.jindal@intel.com>
> Date:   Fri Apr 10 14:37:29 2015 +0530
> 
>     drm/i915/skl: Support for 90/270 rotation
> 
> But they are just the tips of two longish streams of developments
> so they should not necessarily be viewed as offending towards the respective
> authors. They are just final feature enablements.
> 
> All platforms are affected due to partial views I suppose, although I am not
> sure if they are actually used/triggered in the field. That's why I was not
> sure should stable be copied.

Well commits are only in 4.2, so -fixes is ok.

Thanks, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx