Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756401Ab2FNR1L (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:27:11 -0400 Received: from mail-gh0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:40786 "EHLO mail-gh0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753971Ab2FNR1J convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2012 13:27:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [178.83.130.250] In-Reply-To: <4FDA1C03.3020404@cwi.nl> References: <4FD9E69A.4090708@cwi.nl> <4FD9F9B0.9030204@cwi.nl> <4FDA1C03.3020404@cwi.nl> Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 19:27:08 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [3.4 regression] [bisected] DisplayPort fails to come on From: Daniel Vetter To: "Wouter M. Koolen" Cc: Dave Airlie , intergalactic.anonymous@gmail.com, len.brown@intel.com, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , dri-devel , "Barnes, Jesse" , "Wilson, Chris" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1717 Lines: 45 On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Wouter M. Koolen wrote: > On 06/14/2012 03:48 PM, Wouter M. Koolen wrote: >> >> In the mean while I will redo the bisect. > > Hi guys, > > I did a bisect on the actual problem (and not on the maybe-related second > error message). It results in 092945e11c5b84f66dd08f0b87fb729715d377bc: > > Author: Adam Jackson ?2011-07-26 20:39:45 > Committer: Daniel Vetter ?2012-01-17 15:46:56 > Parent: 6919132e7a307b1f181d7655b3ef64cc7581a5ef (drm/i915/dp: Tweak auxch > clock divider for PCH) > Branches: linux-3.4.y, remotes/origin/linux-3.4.y, remotes/origin/master > Follows: v3.2-rc6 > Precedes: v3.4-rc1 > > ? ?drm/i915/dp: Use auxch precharge value of 5 everywhere > > ? ?The default in the Sandybridge docs is 5, as on Ironlake, and I have no > ? ?reason to believe 3 would work any better. > > ? ?Signed-off-by: Adam Jackson > ? ?Acked-by: Jesse Barnes > ? ?Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter > > I guess there is your reason for 3 :) > > Any advice on how to proceed would be very helpful. Well, can you revert this patch (or just replace the 5 with 3 in the code) on top of latest 3.4.x and test whether this is indeed the cause of your regression? Just to make sure that we have the right culprit. Thanks, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch - +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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/