On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Rafał Miłecki zajec5@gmail.com wrote:
2014-02-11 11:41 GMT+01:00 Ilia Mirkin imirkin@alum.mit.edu:
(b) bisect. you can (almost) definitely restrict the bisect to drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau. if you have additional computational power, i would recommend looking into distcc for speeding up the compiles. it may be interesting to also try 3.6.x since 3.7 received a pretty big rewrite. but a git bisect is a lot more direct in figuring these things out :)
After I watched your video, it definitely brought back memories of another bug or perhaps email on this list a while back (definitely within the past year), but unfortunately I can't quite place it :(
I've finally bisected between 3.10 and 3.11:
78ae0ad403daf11cf63da86923d2b5dbeda3af8f is the first bad commit commit 78ae0ad403daf11cf63da86923d2b5dbeda3af8f Author: Ben Skeggs bskeggs@redhat.com Date: Wed Aug 21 11:30:36 2013 +1000
drm/nv04/disp: fix framebuffer pin refcountingI've booted that commit and one commit older few times. Every time I booted 78ae0ad I got corruption. Every time I booted 6ff8c76 (it's the earlier commit), it was OK.
But I bet if you restart X, you get a backtrace, right?
Ben: any idea why this commit caused regression for my hardware? From the commit message I assume it was supposed to affect some ancient nv04 hardware only. Did it accidentally touch my nv4e path code maybe?
All pre-nv50 hardware (including your nv4e) use this path.
-ilia