From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Fix KMS regression on
	Sandybridge/CPT
Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 02:23:46 +0000
Message-ID: <b9dded$gvojco@orsmga002.jf.intel.com>
References: <1288255088-2309-1-git-send-email-zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
	<0d30dc$k0jvij@orsmga001.jf.intel.com>
	<20101029023451.GA1005@zhen-devel.sh.intel.com>
	<849307$a66648@azsmga001.ch.intel.com>
	<20101102062422.GA6369@zhen-devel.sh.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00519E7B4
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Wed,  3 Nov 2010 19:23:49 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20101102062422.GA6369@zhen-devel.sh.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Tue, 2 Nov 2010 14:24:22 +0800, Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> I don't think transcoder bpc setting should matter, but sorry that I'm short
> of time to track down which one extra read made the difference, my sandybridge
> laptop normally refuse to boot on first time.. ;)
> 
> The code operation is same as what we have in .36 kernel, so could you restore 
> behavior back first?

The original patch was unacceptable since it did more than it claimed to
in its changelog. Just disabling the Ironlake workaround and restoring the
FDI normal train on crtc disable is insufficient. I remain dubious that
adding the POSTING_READs is sufficient without at least some explanation
and some testing.

I could break the original patch down into the 5 separate patches (of
which it sounds like we only need 3) and I would still be waiting on
someone to test them...
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre