Re: [ 67/89] drm/radeon: properly track the crtc not_enabled case evergreen_mc_stop()
From: Josh Boyer
Date: Mon Dec 03 2012 - 18:26:41 EST
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Deucher, Alexander
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Josh Boyer [mailto:jwboyer@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 10:25 AM
>> To: Ben Hutchings; Greg KH
>> Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@linux-
>> foundation.org; alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Deucher, Alexander
>> Subject: Re: [ 67/89] drm/radeon: properly track the crtc not_enabled case
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > 3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>> > ------------------
>> > From: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
>> > commit 804cc4a0ad3a896ca295f771a28c6eb36ced7903 upstream.
>> > The save struct is not initialized previously so explicitly
>> > mark the crtcs as not used when they are not in use.
>> > Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Hm. If this is needed in 3.2, presumably it's needed in 3.6 as well. I
>> don't see it queued for 3.6.9, and the Cc: tag is there.
>> Greg, Alex, was this just something that was missed, or am I wrong about
>> it needing to go into 3.6?
> The original patches should go into 3.6 kernels as well:
> I've been meaning to follow up on it, but I haven't had the time. Do I need to send explicit patches to stable@vger or can I just ask the above commits be cherrypicked to 3.6?
Normally the CC tag works. Not entirely sure why it didn't for the one
patch I asked about. The other two commits you've highlighted here are
lacking any sort of stable tag, so you'd have to pipe up here about them.
I went ahead and tried the cherry-pick myself on top of 3.6.9, in the
order you specified above. The 62444b7462a has a trivial conflict coming
back. I've attached an mbox with these three patches. If you want to
give them a glance over and OK them, that would be great.
(Apologies for the attachment. Gmail is going to mess it up otherwise.)
I have them building locally at the moment on top of 3.6.9 and don't
expect many issues, but I can't personally test the fixes myself.
Description: Binary data