[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=CoUWLegGzuXVM1w2Uvez_Y23U2uaZTE_O9Mdn@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:17:17 +0800
From: Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
DRI mailing list <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: more intel drm issues (was Re: [git pull] drm intel only fixes)
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> Rafael send out two patches earlier. Could be related. I was facing
>> issue during resume.
>
> No, I'm aware of the rcu-synchronize thing, this isn't it. This is
> really at the suspend stage, and I had bisected it down to the drm
> changes.
>
> In fact, by now I have bisected it down to a single commit. It's
> another merge commit, which makes me a bit nervous (I bisected another
> issue today, and it turned out to simply not be repeatable).
>
> But this time the merge commit actually has a real conflict that got
> fixed up in the merge, and the code around the conflict waits for
> three seconds, and three seconds is also exactly how long the delay at
> suspend time is. So I get the feeling that this time it's a real
> issue, and what happened was that the merge may have been a mismerge.
I did see that once during suspend. But as you mentioned, 3 seconds,
and it wasn't repeatable. It was at the first suspend right after
reboot.
Jeff
--
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