On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 04:23:40PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Daniel Vetter daniel@ffwll.ch wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:37:44PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Jani Nikula jani.nikula@linux.intel.com wrote:

...

On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Sedat Dilek sedat.dilek@gmail.com wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Sedat Dilek sedat.dilek@gmail.com wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jani Nikula jani.nikula@linux.intel.com wrote: > On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Sedat Dilek sedat.dilek@gmail.com wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Changes since 20130724: >>> >>> Removed tree: >>> arm-dt (at maintainer's request) >>> >>> The wireless-next tree lost its build failure and gained a conflict >>> against Linus' tree. >>> >>> The tty tree lost its build failure. >>> >>> The staging tree gained a build failure for which I disabled a driver. >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >> >> [ CCing drm and drm-intel folks ] >> >> With today's next-20130725 I see the following: > > Use of dev_priv->gt_lock in I915_WRITE through > intel_disable_gt_powersave before spin lock init, caused by > > commit 181d1b9e31c668259d3798c521672afb8edd355c > Author: Daniel Vetter daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch > Date: Sun Jul 21 13:16:24 2013 +0200 > > drm/i915: fix up gt init sequence fallout >

Ah, cool.

I assumed/tested "drm/i915: fix the racy object accounting", but this does not fix it. Will try with yours.

Sorry, Jani.

next-20130725 ships the patch you pointed, too.

Confused. I meant that the above mentioned commit "drm/i915: fix up gt init sequence fallout" causes the problem. The patch I included in my mail should fix it. Could you try that please?

[ Note2myself: Do not read half of the message... ]

The bad... Your patch needed some refresh against next-20130725 (guess it's against drm-intel-nightly).

The good... YES, your patch fixes the issue for me!

The ugly... /me.

Feel free to add my:

   Tested-by: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>

Thanks for the quick fix!

Thanks a lot for the report, since this should be something I should have caught. And for added insult the offending patch is already in Linus' tree :( Patch merged to -fixes.

Hmmm, don't you merge -fixes into -nightly?

I do, but it seems to only blow up with spinlock debugging enabling I think. Our QA should run full debug buils in the -nightly testing, but apparently they didn't catch this. I'm looking into what went wrong here and fix up the process. -Daniel