Patchwork [Maverick,SRU] drm/i915: Avoid pageflipping freeze when we miss the flip prepare interrupt

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Tim Gardner
Date Nov. 24, 2010, 5:56 p.m.
Message ID <20101124175639.323CFF8BAA@sepang.rtg.net>
Download mbox
Permalink /patch/72926/
State Accepted
Delegated to: Tim Gardner
Headers show

Pull-request

git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204

Comments

Tim Gardner - Nov. 24, 2010, 5:56 p.m.
The following changes since commit fbf6dfc88c549151dffac531e919b5b9c2b0346a:
  Tim Gardner (1):
        UBUNTU: Simplify the use of CROSS_COMPILER

are available in the git repository at:

  git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204

Simon Farnsworth (1):
      drm/i915: Avoid pageflipping freeze when we miss the flip prepare interrupt

 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c  |   50 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c      |   51 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c |   14 ++------
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_drv.h     |   10 ++++++
 4 files changed, 113 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Tim Gardner - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:04 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 10:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> The following changes since commit fbf6dfc88c549151dffac531e919b5b9c2b0346a:
>    Tim Gardner (1):
>          UBUNTU: Simplify the use of CROSS_COMPILER
>
> are available in the git repository at:
>
>    git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>

Hmm, I was experimenting with 'git request-pull -p' which doesn't append 
the full commit log message. Anyways, this is an upstream cherry-pick, 
which is not obvious from the pull-request text.

rtg
Brad Figg - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:13 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 10:04 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 10:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> The following changes since commit fbf6dfc88c549151dffac531e919b5b9c2b0346a:
>>     Tim Gardner (1):
>>           UBUNTU: Simplify the use of CROSS_COMPILER
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>
>>     git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>
>
> Hmm, I was experimenting with 'git request-pull -p' which doesn't append
> the full commit log message. Anyways, this is an upstream cherry-pick,
> which is not obvious from the pull-request text.
>
> rtg

Is this a "pre-stable" request? I don't see a buglink. That's why I'm asking for
a buglink. We need a tracking bug to go with this and a commitment that you can
verify the fix once it hits -proposed.

Brad
Brad Figg - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:14 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 10:13 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 10:04 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 10:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> The following changes since commit fbf6dfc88c549151dffac531e919b5b9c2b0346a:
>>>      Tim Gardner (1):
>>>            UBUNTU: Simplify the use of CROSS_COMPILER
>>>
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>
>>>      git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I was experimenting with 'git request-pull -p' which doesn't append
>> the full commit log message. Anyways, this is an upstream cherry-pick,
>> which is not obvious from the pull-request text.
>>
>> rtg
>
> Is this a "pre-stable" request? I don't see a buglink. That's why I'm asking for
> a buglink. We need a tracking bug to go with this and a commitment that you can
> verify the fix once it hits -proposed.
>
> Brad

nevermind
Tim Gardner - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:18 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 11:13 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 10:04 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 10:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> The following changes since commit fbf6dfc88c549151dffac531e919b5b9c2b0346a:
>>>      Tim Gardner (1):
>>>            UBUNTU: Simplify the use of CROSS_COMPILER
>>>
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>
>>>      git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I was experimenting with 'git request-pull -p' which doesn't append
>> the full commit log message. Anyways, this is an upstream cherry-pick,
>> which is not obvious from the pull-request text.
>>
>> rtg
>
> Is this a "pre-stable" request? I don't see a buglink. That's why I'm asking for
> a buglink. We need a tracking bug to go with this and a commitment that you can
> verify the fix once it hits -proposed.
>
> Brad

The BugLink is actually in the commit log.
Brad Figg - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:45 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>    git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204

Looks good.

Acked-by: Brad Figg <brad.figg@canonical.com>
Tim Gardner - Nov. 24, 2010, 6:50 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 11:45 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>     git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>
> Looks good.
>
> Acked-by: Brad Figg<brad.figg@canonical.com>
>

Applied to maverick master-next
Brad Figg - Nov. 24, 2010, 9:39 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 10:50 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 11:45 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>
>> Looks good.
>>
>> Acked-by: Brad Figg<brad.figg@canonical.com>
>>
>
> Applied to maverick master-next
>

I was sort of expecting someone else to also Ack this.

Brad
Tim Gardner - Nov. 24, 2010, 9:44 p.m.
On 11/24/2010 02:39 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 10:50 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 11:45 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
>>> On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>>> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>>
>>> Looks good.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Brad Figg<brad.figg@canonical.com>
>>>
>>
>> Applied to maverick master-next
>>
>
> I was sort of expecting someone else to also Ack this.
>
> Brad

I didn't write the patch. Isn't my Ack enough? Besides, its already been 
vetted by 2 other upstream developers.

rtg
Brad Figg - Nov. 25, 2010, 12:21 a.m.
On 11/24/2010 01:44 PM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 02:39 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 10:50 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> On 11/24/2010 11:45 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
>>>> On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>>>> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>>>
>>>> Looks good.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Brad Figg<brad.figg@canonical.com>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Applied to maverick master-next
>>>
>>
>> I was sort of expecting someone else to also Ack this.
>>
>> Brad
>
> I didn't write the patch. Isn't my Ack enough? Besides, its already been vetted by 2 other upstream developers.
>
> rtg

Maybe it is my misunderstanding of our process. I have observed in the past
that it appeared the submitter, even of an upstream cherry-pick didn't count
as an ack. Now, not all submitters have been senior kdevs.

It makes sense that since the commit came from upstream with those Acks/Sobs
and your own, that should be enough.

Brad
Stefan Bader - Nov. 25, 2010, 10:04 a.m.
On 11/25/2010 01:21 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
> On 11/24/2010 01:44 PM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> On 11/24/2010 02:39 PM, Brad Figg wrote:
>>> On 11/24/2010 10:50 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>>> On 11/24/2010 11:45 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
>>>>> On 11/24/2010 09:56 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>>>>> git://kernel.ubuntu.com/rtg/ubuntu-maverick.git i915-page-flip-lp680204
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks good.
>>>>>
>>>>> Acked-by: Brad Figg<brad.figg@canonical.com>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Applied to maverick master-next
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was sort of expecting someone else to also Ack this.
>>>
>>> Brad
>>
>> I didn't write the patch. Isn't my Ack enough? Besides, its already been vetted by 2 other upstream developers.
>>
>> rtg
> 
> Maybe it is my misunderstanding of our process. I have observed in the past
> that it appeared the submitter, even of an upstream cherry-pick didn't count
> as an ack. Now, not all submitters have been senior kdevs.
> 
> It makes sense that since the commit came from upstream with those Acks/Sobs
> and your own, that should be enough.
> 
> Brad

You could freely change it by now. I used to exclude the submitter of an
upstream patch from the acks normally. The reasoning to me was that when I
submit patches, I am usually biased and not very critical in the review.

But that may just been my personal reading of the two ack rule. And whatever you
decide, then chisel the result into wiki-stone.

-Stefan