On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:34:38AM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 12:17:24PM -0600, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > From: Manoj Iyer <email@example.com>
> > Please consider the following sauce patch to Oneiric.
> > SRU JUSTIFICATION
> > ================
> > ISSUE
> > =====
> > Ivybridge system fails to resume from S3/S4 with recent BIOS. On system resume causes kernel oops in i915 driver.
> > FIX
> > ===
> > Upstream fixed the issue by adding multi-threaded forcewake support.
> > On IVB C0+ with newer BIOSes, the forcewake handshake has changed. There's
> > now a bitfield for different driver components to keep the GT powered
> > on. On Linux, we centralize forcewake handling in one place, so we
> > still just need a single bit, but we need to use the new registers if MT
> > forcewake is enabled.
> > TEST
> > =====
> > This patch was tested on Ivybridge system with the kernel posted at http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~sarvatt/fdo42923/ and the test results are noted in comment #3 in this bug, and also reported the same to https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42923
> > The following changes since commit f0bba7483b90dabcf025dc923e0722f5ff9b5e6d:
> > UBUNTU: SAUCE: drm/i915: add multi-threaded forcewake support (2011-11-21 11:37:20 -0600)
> > are available in the git repository at:
> > git://kernel.ubuntu.com/manjo/ubuntu-oneiric.git lp891270
> > Manoj Iyer (1):
> > UBUNTU: SAUCE: drm/i915: add multi-threaded forcewake support
> It seems you still have the attribution problem that Tim pointed out
> earlier, as this is showing you as the patch author. I also notice that
> the patch from the mailing list has a description of what the patch is
> doing and sign-offs, which I think we should be including.
Sorry, ignore this. I pulled up the wrong message, so I looked at the
old branch in your tree. I'll look at the right one this time
kernel-team mailing list