| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:13:36 +0100 From: Sitsofe Wheeler <sitsofe@...oo.com> To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org> Cc: intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: fix vblank wait test condition On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 11:31:16AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote: > When converting this to the new wait_for macro I inverted the wait > condition, which causes all sorts of problems. So correct it to fix > several failures caused by the bad wait (flickering, bad output > detection, tearing, etc.). Further testing has shown this fixed one set of cases where strange behaviour happened on my EeePC but there are other triggers. I've found the following: With this patch booting without a battery in the machine will lead to a stable system without lots of errors appearing in dmesg (just one "Insufficient FIFO" at boot). Doing "watch --differences=cumulative xrandr" always shows the same outputs. VT switching occasionally causes the occasional "*ERROR* vblank wait timed out" message. However doing a suspend/resume brings back all the problems, dmesg starts filling up with FIFO errors and xrandr starts reporting different outputs every time it is called. Additionally, booting with a battery inside the machine at boot will always lead to the quirky behaviour too. -- Sitsofe | http://sucs.org/~sits/ -- 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