linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-gfx] 3.15-rc5: Regression in i915 driver?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140512165407.GT25056@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:	Mon, 12 May 2014 18:54:07 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] 3.15-rc5: Regression in i915 driver?

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:09:54AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Sun, 11 May 2014, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch> wrote:
> > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On 11 May 2014 18:28, Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de> wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> 3.14.3 works as expected.
> >>> 3.15-rc5 shows a strange behaviour: When resuming from ram the X server
> >>> seems to be disfunctional.
> >>>
> >>> I see this WARNING in the kernel log before suspend to ram in the early
> >>> boot process:
> >
> > Doesn't ring a bell really.
> > - Is there anything in dmesg after resume?
> > - How exactly does X misbehave? Is fbcon still working? Does X
> > behaviour get restored if you restart X?
> > - Can you please try to bisect this issue? Note that the backlight
> > issue might be unrelated to the issues with X misbehaving after
> > resume. You might need to do a bisect for both if the symptoms don't
> > agree.
> 
> I agree the WARNING from i965_enable_backlight() is unrelated. Focus on
> the other symptoms first.

The backlight backtrace seems to be a genuine new bug. Bisecting it would
be highly appreciated. Bisecting on the other issue and appending the
result to the bug Chris quoated should also really be useful - atm we
don't have any reported who can reproduce this clearly enough to do a
bisect.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
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/