| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49908480.6070408@numericable.fr>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:31:12 +0100
From: etienne <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr>
To: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Soeren Sonnenburg <kernel@....de>
Subject: Re: [Bug #12613] [Suspend regression][DRM, RADEON]
Dave Airlie wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 8:07 AM, etienne <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr> 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 <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr>
>>> 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 <etienne.basset@...ericable.fr>
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 <http://cpbotha.net>
*/
-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)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists