Re: [Intel-gfx] [3.14.0-rc4] regression: drm FIFO underruns

[Daniel Vetter]

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Please don't make things more prominent if the fixes can't be merged
> without rewriting the world,
>
> Distros have auto reporting tools for the major backtrace warnings,
> and releasing kernels with unfixable ones in it make it hard to know
> what is real and what isn't.

Fully agreed if we can't fix them. But we also need to strike some
balance for otherwise we can never enable we self-tests. And I
absolutely want those enable to have the best possible regression
testing coverage. E.g. every time we add a substantial amount of new
checks to the modeset state checker it takes 1-2 releases to settle
all the fallout. But we're backporting all the fixes, except when
they're too invasive (in which case we disable the check temporarily
or restrict it).
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/