Re: Intel 915GM MCHBAR bug

[Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>]

On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:37:00 +0300
Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:14:41 +0300 Pekka Enberg
> <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> >>>> Wanna show us the patch?
> >>>>
> >>>> Because the world could certainly do with more i915 bugfixes :(
> >>>   
> >>> Here is Jesse's patch from 
> >>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2009-January/001186.html 
> >>> adopted for 2.6.30-rc8... (needed to redo hunk #3 for
> >>> i915_gem_tile.c)
> >> Yup. I took the two patches from here:
> >>
> >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/349314
> >>
> >> and did the same rediffing on top of 2.6.30-rc8 for the first one.
> >>
> >> Andrew, do you want me to forward you the (tested) patches or
> >> should we wait for Jesse et al to take care of it?
> > 
> > Yes, please send them out.
> 
> OK, I did that. I am bit unhappy that I had to do it, though. The
> patch dates back to January (!) and Ubuntu folks have been carrying
> it for a while now.
> 
> Looking at the amount of reports out in the wild (on Ubuntu forums, 
> etc.), I really don't understand why this wasn't submitted earlier. 
> Instead, the bug was flagged with low priority because it's "just a 
> performance problem." Considering the system is more or less unusable 
> for me, I obviously think it's a critical bug fix.
> 
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > These might end up being 2.6.30.1 material.
> 
> Yes, agreed completely. We probably want ACK from Jesse and Bjorn,
> though.

I'm ok with it being 2.6.30.1 stuff, but given the significance of the
change we were worried about putting it into 2.6.30 late in the cycle.
But as you say, it's a very important performance fix for many
machines...

Anyway, Eric may already have it merged.  Eric?

Jesse