On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:44 PM Laurent Carlier lordheavym@gmail.com wrote:

Le vendredi 24 août 2018, 00:37:51 CEST Kristian H. Kristensen a écrit :

...

https://dri.freedesktop.org/libdrm/libdrm-2.4.94.tar.bz2

-> Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /libdrm/libdrm-2.4.94.tar.bz2 on this server.

Fixed.

...

PGP: https://dri.freedesktop.org/libdrm/libdrm-2.4.94.tar.bz2.sig

-> Not Found

The requested URL /libdrm/libdrm-2.4.94.tar.bz2.sig was not found on this server.

Yes, I don't have a PGP key, I should have edited that out of the email template.

thanks, Kristian

Laurent Carlier http://www.archlinux.org_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 1:13 AM Michel Dänzer michel@daenzer.net wrote:

On 2018-08-24 12:37 a.m., Kristian H. Kristensen wrote:

...

Benjamin Gaignard (2): tests/modetest: Add atomic support tests/util: Add support for stm module

Christian König (7): amdgpu: stop using the hash table for fd_tab amdgpu: add handle table implementation v2 amdgpu: use handle table for KMS handles amdgpu: use handle table for flink names amdgpu: remove the hash table implementation amdgpu: always add all BOs to handle table amdgpu: fix off by one in handle_table_insert

Junwei Zhang (5): amdgpu: add bo from user memory to handle table amdgpu: add a function to find bo by cpu mapping (v2) tests/amdgpu: add test for finding bo by CPU mapping amdgpu: free flink bo in bo import amdgpu: add a function to create amdgpu bo internally (v4)

Kristian H. Kristensen (1): Bump to version 2.4.94

Likun Gao (1): amdgpu: Disable deadlock test suite for RV

Michel Dänzer (2): amdgpu: Use uint32_t i in amdgpu_find_bo_by_cpu_mapping amdgpu: Eliminate void* arithmetic in amdgpu_find_bo_by_cpu_mapping

Mike Lothian (1): libdrm: Fix amdgpu build failure

Rob Clark (2): freedreno: don't leak stateobj rb refs freedreno: fix use-after-free with stateobj rb's

Rodrigo Vivi (1): intel: Add a new CFL PCI ID.

Tanmay Shah (1): libdrm: add msm drm uapi header

Would have been nice to wait for https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/245762/ to land, or at least give a little heads up, before making a release.

I don't know what all is pending for libdrm, but I know that we've agreed on a very low bar for when to release libdrm:

"The release criteria for libdrm is essentially "if you need a release, make one". There is no designated release engineer or maintainer. Anybody is free to make a release if there's a certain feature or bug fix they need in a released version of libdrm."

Kristian

-- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.amd.com Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and X developer

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 06:37:35PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:

On 2018-08-24 6:27 p.m., Kristian Høgsberg wrote:

...

I don't know what all is pending for libdrm, but I know that we've agreed on a very low bar for when to release libdrm:

"The release criteria for libdrm is essentially "if you need a release, make one". There is no designated release engineer or maintainer. Anybody is free to make a release if there's a certain feature or bug fix they need in a released version of libdrm."

First of all, let me assure you that I'm not picking on you in particular, this applies to anybody who makes a release.

Quite frankly, that sucks. :) A brief "heads up, I'm cutting a libdrm release, let me know if there's something you want in it" e-mail at least 24 hours (not counting weekend days) before making the release shouldn't be asking too much.

Given that making a libdrm release is pretty much for free I'm not sure about the concern. We've had plenty of back-to-back libdrm releases. Since libdrm is supposed to be always in release state (it's mostly just headers and simple wrappers) I don't see a downside aside from "looks mildly silly" :-)

If we'd have a libdrm release maintainer that'd be different, but no one volunteered (and for years) so that's unlikely to change. -Daniel

On 2018-08-24 7:44 p.m., Laurent Carlier wrote:

11/15 amdgpu-symbol-check FAIL 0.22 s (exit status 1)

--- command --- LANG='en_US.UTF-8' SUDO_GID='0' OLDPWD='/build/libdrm/src' COMMAND_MODE='legacy' USERNAME='builduser' SUDO_COMMAND='/bin/bash -c bash -c cd\ /startdir;\ makepkg\ "$@" -bash --syncdeps --noconfirm --log --holdver -- skipinteg --install' CFLAGS='-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -fstack- protector-strong -fno-plt' USER='builduser' CXXFLAGS='-march=x86-64 - mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -fno-plt' TEXTDOMAINDIR='/ usr/share/locale' PWD='/build/libdrm/src/build' HOME='/build' TEXTDOMAIN='pacman-scripts' SUDO_USER='root' SUDO_UID='0' MAIL='/var/mail/ builduser' CHOST='x86_64-pc-linux-gnu' SHELL='/bin/bash' TERM='xterm-256color' SHLVL='3' CPPFLAGS='-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2' SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH='1535132201' LOGNAME='builduser' LDFLAGS='-Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--as-needed,-z,relro,- z,now' PATH='/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/ bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/ usr/bin/core_perl:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl:/ usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl' MAKEFLAGS='-j9' _='/usr/bin/meson' NM='/usr/bin/nm' /usr/bin/bash /build/libdrm/src/build/../ libdrm-2.4.94/amdgpu/amdgpu-symbol-check amdgpu/libdrm_amdgpu.so.1.0.0 --- stdout --- amdgpu_find_bo_by_cpu_mapping

Part of the problem here is probably that the *-symbol-check scripts haven't actually checked anything in an autotools build since commit 4f08bfe96da1 ("*-symbol-check: Don't hard-code nm executable"):

../../amdgpu/amdgpu-symbol-check: line 74: -D: command not found PASS amdgpu-symbol-check (exit status: 0)

On 2018-08-27 12:03 p.m., Emil Velikov wrote:

On 27 August 2018 at 10:38, Michel Dänzer michel@daenzer.net wrote:

...

On 2018-08-24 7:44 p.m., Laurent Carlier wrote:

...

11/15 amdgpu-symbol-check FAIL 0.22 s (exit status 1)

--- command --- LANG='en_US.UTF-8' SUDO_GID='0' OLDPWD='/build/libdrm/src' COMMAND_MODE='legacy' USERNAME='builduser' SUDO_COMMAND='/bin/bash -c bash -c cd\ /startdir;\ makepkg\ "$@" -bash --syncdeps --noconfirm --log --holdver -- skipinteg --install' CFLAGS='-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -fstack- protector-strong -fno-plt' USER='builduser' CXXFLAGS='-march=x86-64 - mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -fno-plt' TEXTDOMAINDIR='/ usr/share/locale' PWD='/build/libdrm/src/build' HOME='/build' TEXTDOMAIN='pacman-scripts' SUDO_USER='root' SUDO_UID='0' MAIL='/var/mail/ builduser' CHOST='x86_64-pc-linux-gnu' SHELL='/bin/bash' TERM='xterm-256color' SHLVL='3' CPPFLAGS='-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2' SOURCE_DATE_EPOCH='1535132201' LOGNAME='builduser' LDFLAGS='-Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--as-needed,-z,relro,- z,now' PATH='/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/ bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/ usr/bin/core_perl:/usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl:/ usr/bin/site_perl:/usr/bin/vendor_perl:/usr/bin/core_perl' MAKEFLAGS='-j9' _='/usr/bin/meson' NM='/usr/bin/nm' /usr/bin/bash /build/libdrm/src/build/../ libdrm-2.4.94/amdgpu/amdgpu-symbol-check amdgpu/libdrm_amdgpu.so.1.0.0 --- stdout --- amdgpu_find_bo_by_cpu_mapping

Part of the problem here is probably that the *-symbol-check scripts haven't actually checked anything in an autotools build since commit 4f08bfe96da1 ("*-symbol-check: Don't hard-code nm executable"):

../../amdgpu/amdgpu-symbol-check: line 74: -D: command not found PASS amdgpu-symbol-check (exit status: 0)

Disclaimer: Coffee hasn't kicked in fully

I'm afraid it shows. :)

It does work as intended. Problem is that: a) when running manually one needs to set NM

I realize that, but the above is the contents of amdgpu/amdgpu-symbol-check.log in the build tree.