Re: [3.16.y-ckt stable] Linux 3.16.7-ckt4 stable review

[Thomas Voegtle]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2015, Luis Henriques wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 12:35:58AM +0100, Thomas Voegtle wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Jan 2015, Luis Henriques wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 09:30:45PM +0100, Thomas Voegtle wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 12 Jan 2015, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is the start of the review cycle for the Linux 3.16.7-ckt4 stable kernel.
> > > > >
> > > > > This version contains 216 new patches, summarized below.  The new patches are
> > > > > posted as replies to this message and also available in this git branch:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/linux.git;h=linux-3.16.y-review;a=shortlog
> > > > >
> > > > > git://kernel.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/linux.git  linux-3.16.y-review
> > > > >
> > > > > The review period for version 3.16.7-ckt4 will be open for the next three days.
> > > > > To report a problem, please reply to the relevant follow-up patch message.
> > > > >
> > > > > For more information about the Linux 3.16.y-ckt extended stable kernel version,
> > > > > see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/ExtendedStable .
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Something is wrong with drm/i915 (I guess). I had a terrible memleak on Xorg
> > > > when using mplayer using more and more RAM, and then the system is swapping
> > > > itself to death.
> > > >
> > > > I'm using a openSUSE 13.1 (x86_64) on a Baytrail J1900 (this is Intel HD
> > > > Gen7).
> > >
> > > Thank you for reporting, Thomas.  Can you please confirm that this is
> > > actually a regression in 3.16.7-ckt4 (i.e., that you can't reproduce
> > > it in 3.16.7-ckt3)?  If so, is it possible to bisecting it?
> >
> >
> > 3.16.7-ckt3 was fine for me.
> >
> > I tried to revert the drm/i915 patches in the review branch, and I got lucky
> > with (only) reverting cb58c663d940a "drm/i915: Disallow pin ioctl completely
> > for kms drivers".
> >
> > No clue, why reverting these few lines helps, but then I have no memleak.
> >
> >
> >      Thomas
>
> Thank a lot for narrowing this down, Thomas!  The text in that commit
> (upstream commit d472fcc8379c) may actually provide an hint for this
> issue.  It asks backporters to make sure they include both
>
> commit b45305fce5bb1abec263fcff9d81ebecd6306ede
> Author: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Mon Dec 17 16:21:27 2012 +0100
>
>    drm/i915: Implement workaround for broken CS tlb on i830/845
>
> and
>
> commit c4d69da167fa967749aeb70bc0e94a457e5d00c1
> Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Mon Sep 8 14:25:41 2014 +0100
>
>    drm/i915: Evict CS TLBs between batches
>
> For some reason, this second commit (which was tagged for stable!)
> isn't in 3.16, and I completely missed that.
>
> Would you be able to verify that adding this commit (backport attached
> bellow) fixes the issue?


Mh, no, sorry, that doesn't fix it. Very fast memleak with /usr/bin/X.

I used linux-3.16.y-review (with no reverts) + your patch from previous 
mail.




--
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/