Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Revert "nouveau/gsp: fix suspend/resume regression on r570 firmware"

["Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>]

On Tue Jun 30, 2026 at 1:53 PM CEST, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 06:42:33PM -0400, Lyude Paul wrote:
>> This reverts commit 8302d0afeaec0bc57d951dd085e0cffe997d4d18.
>> 
>> It turns out this looked like the right fix on some systems, but it's not -
>> as this causes runtime PM to actually fail on many a laptop.
>> 
>> [I have set the fixes to an older commit then the one that is reverted
>> here, because when applied with the other patches in this series, this
>> appears to /fully/ fix runtime PM in addition to the regression]
>
> No need to have this in the commit message, move it to the comment block...
>
>> Fixes: 53dac0623853 ("drm/nouveau/gsp: add support for 570.144")
>
> I'm not sure, actually, that this is a correct approach. You can't revert
> something that never appeared (in time range between 53dac0623853 and
> 8302d0afeaec). Have you consulted with the stable kernel process documentation
> and/or respective maintainers?

I think it should be as simple as picking

Fixes: 8302d0afeaec ("nouveau/gsp: fix suspend/resume regression on r570 firmware")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.19+

for this commit and keep patches 2, 3 and 4 as they are.

The commit message of this revert can then explain that the commit that was
attempted to fix with this revert, i.e. commit 53dac0623853 ("drm/nouveau/gsp:
add support for 570.144") is fixed with a different, subsequent approach.

This seems correct, as reverting a bad fix does not claim to solve the original
problem.

Thanks,
Danilo