Omgili, forum search, forums search, search forums, discussion search,discussions search, search discussions, board search, boards search, search boards
  Advanced Search

Re: LP:919350 Regression Commit Identified

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:41:48 -0700, Tim Gardner <...@gmail.com

Maybe you should hassle the upstream dudes about this one. Also, since
its a backport, take a really close look to make sure there were no errors.

Cc'ing u-k-t and the stable team since this is an Oneiric regression.

rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim....@canonical.com

--
kernel-team mailing list
kern...@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team



On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:51:51 -0200, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <...@canonical.com

The same change on oneiric is causing an issue on Precise as well, but a
different one (reported to be on resume from suspend):
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/917330

So 3.2 also presents a regression, but in a different way, and is
already being worked upstream to be fixed (reported also here:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/21/66, initial fix here:


The reports on bug 919350 is a different regression (no screen on boot),
and people there says that 3.2 works fine. I didn't find any problem in
the backport, except that it still uses (doesn't change)
dev_priv-is low to make the link value less than it should be, resulting in the
failure later (wrong link * lanes selection).

May be the backport for 3.0 requires also commits
858fa03527ded333dc5701f546bd5d1b5d7515ad and
89c6143263ef8e14e42e17324a234418d8030b10 (with this last one changed
later to not use intel_crtc-suspend issue in 3.2).

But I tend that we should just revert the backport from oneiric, even if
bringing back bug 899598 (better a low resolution than no screen at all),
we are already bringing to many changes to a stable release and
diverging. Let me know what you think, I can send a revert for the
oneiric kernel, or ask reporters on 919350 to try the backport again
plus the additional changes.

--
[]'s
Herton

--
kernel-team mailing list
kern...@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:41:39 -0700, Tim Gardner <...@gmail.com

Reverting would be my inclination.

rtg
--
Tim Gardner tim....@canonical.com

--
kernel-team mailing list
kern...@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 07:09:58 -0800, Brad Figg <...@canonical.com

I concur. Lets get this out of Oneiric and get it respun. We can
get this out in this cycle.

Brad
--
Brad Figg brad...@canonical.com http://www.canonical.com

--
kernel-team mailing list
kern...@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:43:14 -0200, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <...@canonical.com

Ok, I'm going to revert it directly on master and respinning oneiric today.

--
[]'s
Herton

--
kernel-team mailing list
kern...@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team