linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/radeon: Fix regression with suspend/resume

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: <1424560681.23181.2.camel@theros.lm.intel.com>
Date:	Sat, 21 Feb 2015 16:18:01 -0700
From:	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Christian König <deathsimple@...afone.de>
Cc:	"Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@....com>,
	Michel Dänzer <michel@...nzer.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>, Lauri Kasanen <cand@....com>,
	"Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/radeon: Fix regression with suspend/resume

On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 13:02 +0100, Christian König wrote:
> Well, what the patch does is just changing where buffers are placed in 
> memory. E.g. now we place the buffer at the end of memory as well.
> 
> So I can imagine at least three possible causes for the issues you see:
> 1. We haven't implemented all buffer placement restrictions correctly 
> and without the patch everything just works fine by coincident.
> 2. Something is overwriting the buffer at it's new location. 
> @Alex&Michel: Didn't we had a similar problem internally recently? Or 
> was that just for APUs?
> 3. One of the memory chips on your hardware is faulty and without the 
> patch the we just don't use the affected region (rather unlikely).
> 
> For testing could you try to limit the amount of VRAM used? E.g. give 
> radeon.vramlimit=256 as kernel commandline to limit the VRAM to the 
> first 256MB.

Tried with the kernel parameter radeon.vramlimit=256, and it seemed to have
the exact same behavior.  The flicker was still there, same size, same
frequency.

Thanks,
- Ross


--
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/