[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzGY59nx0woBDd98yX0oUN+xaXDa1_s4d371KajMst7Og@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 08:20:35 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@....de>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
DRI mailing list <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, lwn@....net,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
Subject: Re: Linux 4.4.4 [regression]
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Jörg-Volker Peetz <jvpeetz@....de> wrote:
>
> This same problem with X does happen in 4.5-rc7. And removing the line
> introduced by patch b36e52c44ce6728824546d8b5f05b844cede96f1 makes X go again on
> my laptop.
Ok, so that's dbb17a21c131eca94eb31136eee9a7fe5aff00d9 in mainline.
Dave, Alex: that commit makes Jörg-Volker's HP Pavilion dv7 with
hybrid graphics (AMD HD 4200 - AMD 5400) unable to run X. No
suspend/resume in sight, just starting X hangs.
I'd guess it's the "radeon_switcheroo_set_state()" craziness (based on
that hybrid graphics thing), but we need to do something since this is
a regression.
Just revert for now? Or do you have other suggestions for Jörg-Volker to test?
Maybe that call to drm_helper_hpd_irq_event() should be purely in the
real resume path?
Or maybe there is something that the switcheroo code does that just
interacts badly with the code in drm_helper_hpd_irq_event()? Deadlock
on mode_config.mutex or something?
I suspect we just need to revert, but if somebody who knows the code
sees some obvious fix, holler quickly, please.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists