From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751854Ab2H0Ems (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:42:48 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:37424 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751117Ab2H0Emq (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Aug 2012 00:42:46 -0400 Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 21:42:42 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Jani Nikula , Yang Guang , Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [ 08/32] drm/i915: correctly order the ring init sequence Message-ID: <20120827044242.GA1874@kroah.com> References: <20120820035647.862247088@linuxfoundation.org> <20120820035649.020303468@linuxfoundation.org> <20120824230313.GD3072@herton-Z68MA-D2H-B3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120824230313.GD3072@herton-Z68MA-D2H-B3> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 08:03:14PM -0300, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote: > On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 08:57:04PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > From: Greg KH > > > > 3.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > From: Daniel Vetter > > > > commit 0d8957c8a90bbb5d34fab9a304459448a5131e06 upstream. > > > > We may only start to set up the new register values after having > > confirmed that the ring is truely off. Otherwise the hw might lose the > > newly written register values. This is caught later on in the init > > sequence, when we check whether the register writes have stuck. > > > > Reviewed-by: Jani Nikula > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=50522 > > Tested-by: Yang Guang > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > I think with this commit also the following commits should be picked for > 3.4 right? (as suggested for 3.0): > > f01db988ef6f6c70a6cc36ee71e4a98a68901229 > b7884eb45ec98c0d34c7f49005ae9d4b4b4e38f6 > > Just reporting that I tested this 3.4.10 proposed update with the two > commits above cherry-picked/backported applied, and worked ok. 3.4.10 as-is works fine for me, so I'm a bit leary of wanting to add more patches to it (or 3.0.42), until I get some kind of confirmation that these two patches are really needed. Anyone else having problems here? thanks, greg k-h