[CCing the other amd drm maintainers]
On 05.06.24 14:04, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 7:06 PM Mikhail Gavrilov
> wrote:
>>
>> Day before yesterday I replaced 7900XTX to 6900XT for got clear in
>> which kernel first time appeared warning message "DMA-API: amdgpu
>>
On 22.05.24 23:18, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 02:39:06PM +0500, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
>> Yesterday on the fresh kernel snapshot
>> I spotted a new bug message with follow stacktrace:
>> [4.307097] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at
>>
tel.com; Leon Weiß
>>>> >>> bochum.de>; sta...@vger.kernel.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org;
>>>> amd-
>>>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/mst: Fix NULL pointer dereference at
>
On 18.04.24 21:43, Harry Wentland wrote:
> On 2024-03-07 01:29, Wayne Lin wrote:
>> [Why]
>> Commit:
>> - commit 5aa1dfcdf0a4 ("drm/mst: Refactor the flow for payload
>> allocation/removement")
>> accidently overwrite the commit
>> - commit 54d217406afe ("drm: use mgr->dev in drm_dbg_kms in
>>
On 08.05.24 14:35, Anders Blomdell wrote:
> On 2024-05-07 07:04, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 06.05.24 16:30, David Wang wrote:
>>>> On 30.04.24 08:13, David Wang wrote:
>>
>>>> And confirmed that the warning is caused by
>&g
On 06.05.24 16:30, David Wang wrote:
>> On 30.04.24 08:13, David Wang wrote:
>> And confirmed that the warning is caused by
>> 07ed11afb68d94eadd4ffc082b97c2331307c5ea and reverting it can fix.
>
> The kernel warning still shows up in 6.9.0-rc7.
> (I think 4 high load processes on a 2-Core VM
On 29.04.24 17:06, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> Following build warnings / errors noticed on Linux next-20240429 tag on the
> arm64, arm and riscv with gcc-8 and gcc-13 builds pass.
>
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing
>
> Commit id:
> b58a0bc904ff nouveau: add command-line GSP-RM
[Adding a few folks and list while dropping the stable list, as this is
unrelated to it]
On 31.03.24 07:59, Andrei Gaponenko wrote:
>
> I noticed a regression with the mailine kernel pre-compiled by EPEL.
> I have just tried linux-6.9-rc1.tar.gz from kernel.org, and it still
> misbehaves.
>
>
On 08.03.24 02:08, Alex Constantino wrote:
> Fix OOM scenario by doing multiple notifications to the OOM handler through
> a busy wait logic.
> Changes from commit 5a838e5d5825 ("drm/qxl: simplify qxl_fence_wait") would
> result in a '[TTM] Buffer eviction failed' exception whenever it reached a
>
On 11.03.24 17:09, Imre Deak wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 09:24:59PM +, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> Sorry for the delay.
Happens, thx for looking onto this!
>> The following trace occurs when using nouveau and unplugging a DP MST
>> adaptor:
> [...]
>> +if (bpp_x16 == 0)
>> +
On 07.03.24 18:58, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> - Forwarded message from Chris Bainbridge
> -
>
> Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2024 21:24:59 +
Hmm, it looks like nobody is looking into this regression. Is there a
good reason?
Imre, or did you maybe just miss that Chris' regression seems to be
On 08.03.24 02:08, Alex Constantino wrote:
> Fix OOM scenario by doing multiple notifications to the OOM handler through
> a busy wait logic.
> Changes from commit 5a838e5d5825 ("drm/qxl: simplify qxl_fence_wait") would
> result in a '[TTM] Buffer eviction failed' exception whenever it reached a
>
On 29.02.24 20:04, Rob Clark wrote:
>
> This is the main pull for v6.9, description below.
>
> [...]
>
> GPU:
> - fix sc7180 UBWC config
Why was that queued for 6.9? That is a fix for a 6.8 regression that for
untrained eyes like mine does not look overly dangerous (but of course I
might be
[adding a bunch of list and people as well as Timur Tabi, who authored
the culprit]
Sid Pranjale, thx for the report. FWIW, I'm just replying to add this to
the regression tracking to ensure it does not fall through the cracks.
Nevertheless let me mention two things while at it:
On 29.02.24
[send with a reduced set of recipients, we all get enough mail already]
On 27.02.24 13:40, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> Since 6.8-rc1 the VT console is no longer mirrored on an external
> display on coldplug or hotplug on the Lenovo ThinkPad X13s.
>
Thx for the report!
> I've previously reported
On 27.01.24 14:14, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>
> In Debian (https://bugs.debian.org/1061449) we got the following
> quotred report:
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:38:16PM +0100, Patrice Duroux wrote:
>> Package: src:linux
>> Version: 6.7.1-1~exp1
>> Severity: normal
>>
>> Giving a try to 6.7,
On 13.02.24 19:00, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>
> Thanks for the report.
>
> I do agree that pm runtime eDP driver got merged that time but I think
> the issue is either a combination of that along with DRM aux bridge
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/122584/ OR just the latter as
> even that
On 27.01.24 14:14, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>
> In Debian (https://bugs.debian.org/1061449) we got the following
> quotred report:
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 07:38:16PM +0100, Patrice Duroux wrote:
>>
>> Giving a try to 6.7, here is a message extracted from dmesg:
>> [4.177226]
Linus, if you have a minute, I'd really like to know...
On 24.01.24 17:41, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 1/24/2024 10:24, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>> On 1/24/24 16:31, Donald Carr wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 7:06 AM Vlastimil Babka wrote:
When testing the rc1 on my openSUSE Tumbleweed
On 23.01.24 10:17, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 23.01.24 09:53, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Wed, 08 Nov 2023, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>
>>> thanks for the patch.
>>>
>>> Am 08.11.23 um 03:46 schrieb Huacai Chen:
>>>> After commit 60
On 23.01.24 09:53, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Nov 2023, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>
>> thanks for the patch.
>>
>> Am 08.11.23 um 03:46 schrieb Huacai Chen:
>>> After commit 60aebc9559492cea ("drivers/firmware: Move sysfb_init() from
>>> device_initcall to subsys_initcall_sync") some Lenovo
[TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux kernel regression
tracking. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 26.10.23 19:33, Alexey Klimov wrote:
> #regzbot introduced: 1cfb4d612127
> #regzbot title: rx7600 stopped working after "1cfb4d612127 drm/amdgpu: put
> MQDs in VRAM"
>
>
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Gerd, it seems this regression[1] fell through the cracks. Could you
please take a look? Or is there a good reason why this can't be
addressed? Or was it dealt with and I
Karol, Lyude, and Daniel:
On 29.11.23 01:37, Owen T. Heisler wrote:
> On 11/21/23 14:23, Owen T. Heisler wrote:
>> On 11/21/23 09:16, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> On 15.11.23 07:19, Owen T. Heisler wrote:
>>>> On 10/31/23 04:18, Linux
On 21.11.23 19:50, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> On 11/21/2023 9:57 AM, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 15.11.23 19:06, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2023 12:06 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:23:10PM +0300, Dmitr
On 15.11.23 19:06, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 12:06 AM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:23:10PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> While developing and testing the commit bfcc3d8f94f4 ("drm/msm/dp:
>>> support setting the DP subconnector type") I had the patch [1] in my
On 15.11.23 07:19, Owen T. Heisler wrote:
> On 10/31/23 04:18, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 28.10.23 04:46, Owen T. Heisler wrote:
>>> #regzbot introduced: d386a4b54607cf6f76e23815c2c9a3abc1d66882
>>> #regzbot link: https://gitlab.freedeskt
On 19.11.23 14:24, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2023 at 04:47:01PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>> On 12.11.23 01:46, Phillip Susi wrote:
I had been testing some things on a post 6.6-rc5 kernel for a week or
two and then when I pulled to a post 6.6 release kernel, I found that
Lo!
On 12.11.23 01:46, Phillip Susi wrote:
> I had been testing some things on a post 6.6-rc5 kernel for a week or
> two and then when I pulled to a post 6.6 release kernel, I found that
> system suspend was broken. It seems that the radeon driver failed to
> suspend, leaving the display dead,
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already in similar form.
See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 15.11.23 09:06, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25,
[TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux kernel regression
tracking. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 04.11.23 10:42, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 22:53, Alex Deucher wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 1:07 PM Sudip Mukherjee
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Nov
[TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux kernel regression
tracking. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 10.08.23 06:19, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 10.08.23 05:03, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>
>> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
&g
On 25.10.23 15:23, Huacai Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 6:08 PM Thorsten Leemhuis
> wrote:
>>
>> Javier, Dave, Sima,
>>
>> On 23.10.23 00:54, Evan Preston wrote:
>>> On 2023-10-20 Fri 05:48pm, Huacai Chen wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 20,
Javier, Dave, Sima,
On 23.10.23 00:54, Evan Preston wrote:
> On 2023-10-20 Fri 05:48pm, Huacai Chen wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 5:35 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
>> Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> On 09.10.23 10:54, Huacai Chen wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Oct 9,
On 09.10.23 10:54, Huacai Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 4:45 PM Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 09:27:02AM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 10:31 PM Huacai Chen wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 7:15 PM Linux
On 19.09.23 16:08, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2023 at 06:14:12PM +0200, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
>>
>> Since v6.5 kernel the following HW:
>>
>> * Lenovo T460s laptop with Skylake GT2 [HD Graphics 520] (rev 07)
>> * Lenovo T490s laptop with WhiskeyLake-U GT2 [UHD Graphics 620] (rev
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker.
On 13.09.23 14:02, Jaak Ristioja wrote:
>
> Upgrading to Linux 6.5 on a Lenovo ThinkPad L570
[TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux kernel regression
tracking. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 31.08.23 20:48, Sudip Mukherjee (Codethink) wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The latest mainline kernel branch fails to build mips jazz_defconfig with
> the error:
>
>
[TLDR: This mail in primarily relevant for Linux kernel regression
tracking. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 04.08.23 14:02, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 02.08.23 23:28, Olaf Skibbe wrote:
>> Dear Maintainers,
>>
>> Hereby I would like to report an appare
On 11.08.23 20:10, Mikhail Rudenko wrote:
> On 2023-08-11 at 08:45 +02, Thorsten Leemhuis
> wrote:
>> On 10.08.23 21:33, Mikhail Rudenko wrote:
>>> The following is a copy an issue I posted to drm/i915 gitlab [1] two
>>> months ago. I repost it to the mailing l
[CCing the i915 maintainers and the dri maintainers]
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker.
On 10.08.23 21:33, Mikhail Rudenko wrote:
> The following is a copy an issue I posted to drm/i915 gitlab [1] two
> months ago. I repost it to the mailing lists in hope that it will help
On 10.08.23 05:03, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>
> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
>
>> Kernel 6.4.6 compiled from source worked AOK on my desktop with Intel Xeon
>> cpu and Nvidia graphics - see below for system specs.
>>
>> Kernels 6.4.7 & 6.4.8 also compiled from
On 09.08.23 15:13, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> If this can't be fixed quickly, I suppose it's safer to revert it from
> 6.4.y for now. 6.5 is still being cooked, but 6.4.x is already in
> wide deployment, hence the regression has to be addressed quickly.
Good luck with that. To quote
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
Hi!
On 02.08.23 23:28, Olaf Skibbe wrote:
> Dear Maintainers,
>
> Hereby I would like to report an apparent bug in the nouveau driver in
> linux/6.1.38-2.
Thx for your report. Maybe your problem is caused by a incomplete
backport. I Cced the maintainers for the drivers (and the regressions
and
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
What's the status wrt to this regression (caused by 8ddce13ae69 from
Marek)? It looks like things are stalled and the regression still is
unresolved, but I ask because I
On 19.07.23 14:30, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 7/19/23 18:49, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 18.07.23 02:51, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
>>>
>>>> After I updated to 6.4 through Archlinux kernel update,
On 18.07.23 02:51, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>
> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
>
>> After I updated to 6.4 through Archlinux kernel update, suddenly I noticed
>> random packet losses on my routers like nodes. I have these networking
>> relevant config on my nodes
>>
On 10.07.23 10:12, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
> On 06/07/2023 15:03, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 06.07.23 11:58, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
>>> Aspeed always report the display port as "connected", because it
>>> doesn't set a .detec
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already in similar form.
See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 05.07.23 06:45, Amit Pundir wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Jul
On 06.07.23 11:58, Jocelyn Falempe wrote:
> Aspeed always report the display port as "connected", because it
> doesn't set a .detect callback.
> Fix this by providing the proper detect callback for astdp and dp501.
>
> This also fixes the following regression:
> Since commit fae7d186403e
On 16.04.23 14:34, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 11:55:08AM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
>> Since commit 241d2fb56a18 ("of: Make OF framebuffer device names unique"),
>> as spotted by Frédéric Bonnard, the historical "of-display" device is
>> gone: the updated logic
On 05.06.23 12:18, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 01:05:36PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 at 13:02, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
>>> Virtual terminals are still broken with 6.4-rc5 on the Lenovo ThinkPad
>>> X13s two weeks after I reported this, and there has
On 17.05.23 17:15, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
> for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
>
> Dmitry, was any progress made to address this regression? Doesn't look
>
the regression tracking bot needs to be told manually
about the fix. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 14.05.23 14:10, Linux regression tracking #adding (Thorsten Leemhuis)
wrote:
> On 12.05.23 15:20, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> Sorry for late regression detection but this patch
On 25.05.23 12:55, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 5/25/23 17:52, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>
>> I notice a regression report on Bugzilla [1]. Quoting from it:
>> [...]
>> Anyway, I'm adding it to regzbot:
>>
>> #regzbot introduced: v6.1.12..v6.2.12
>> #regzbot title: vast raster right and bottom borders on
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Was a proper solution for the regression the initial mail in this thread
is about ever found? Doesn't look like it for here, but maybe I'm
missing something.
Reminder, the
Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting
for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Dmitry, was any progress made to address this regression? Doesn't look
like it, but I strongly suspect I'm missing something, as I'm not really
sure if I properly understood
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
Hi!
On 10.05.23 10:26, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>
> I noticed a regression report on Bugzilla ([1]). As many developers don't
> have a look on it, I decided to forward it by email. See the report
> for the full thread.
>
> Quoting from the report:
>
>> Azamat S. Kalimoulline 2021-04-06 15:45:08
On 02.05.23 15:48, Felix Richter wrote:
> On 5/2/23 15:34, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>> On 02.05.23 15:13, Alex Deucher wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 7:45 AM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
>>> Leemhuis) wrote:
>>>
>>
On 02.05.23 15:13, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 7:45 AM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
> Leemhuis) wrote:
>
>> On 30.04.23 13:44, Felix Richter wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am running into an issue with the integrated GPU of the Ryzen
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
Lo!
Sometimes the regression tracker runs into regressions himself... :-D
On 11.04.23 08:47, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> After merging the drm tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_pool.c:73:29: error: variably modified
>
On 20.04.23 17:57, Pierre Asselin wrote:
> Some legacy BIOSes report no reserved bits in their 32-bit rgb mode,
> breaking the calculation of bits_per_pixel in commit f35cd3fa7729
> ("firmware/sysfb: Fix EFI/VESA format selection"). However they report
> lfb_depth correctly for those modes. Keep
the regression tracking bot needs to be told manually
about the fix. See link in footer if these mails annoy you.]
On 08.04.23 13:26, Linux regression tracking #adding (Thorsten Leemhuis)
wrote:
>
> On 06.04.23 17:45, Pierre Asselin wrote:
>> Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> [...]
>&g
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have
On 03.04.23 18:23, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> [...]
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> index 828997bc9ff9..12d58ddc2b8a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
> +++
On 31.03.23 12:08, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 11:39:22AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
>> -Please check the link to make sure that it is actually working and points
>> -to the relevant message.
>> +If the URL points to a bug report that is fixed b
On 31.03.23 11:44, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Thorsten,
>
> On 31/03/2023 10:57, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 30.03.23 20:13, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>> "Link:" and "Closes:" tags have to be used with public URLs.
>>>
>>> It is
On 30.03.23 20:13, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Since v6.3, checkpatch.pl now complains about the use of "Closes:" tags
> followed by a link [1]. It also complains if a "Reported-by:" tag is
> followed by a "Closes:" one [2].
>
> As detailed in the first patch, this "Closes:" tag is used for a bit of
On 30.03.23 20:13, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> "Link:" and "Closes:" tags have to be used with public URLs.
>
> It is difficult to make sure the link is public but at least we can
> verify the tag is followed by 'http(s):'.
>
> With that, we avoid such a tag that is not allowed [1]:
>
> Closes:
On 27.03.23 15:06, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Thorsten,
>
> On 25/03/2023 07:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 24.03.23 19:52, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>> As a follow-up of the previous patch modifying the documentation to
>>> allow using the "Closes:"
On 27.03.23 15:05, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>
> Thank you for your reply!
Thank you for working on this!
> On 26/03/2023 13:28, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 24.03.23 19:52, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>> Making sure a bug tracker is up to date is not an easy task. For
>
On 24.03.23 19:52, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Making sure a bug tracker is up to date is not an easy task. For
> example, a first version of a patch fixing a tracked issue can be sent a
> long time after having created the issue. But also, it can take some
> time to have this patch accepted upstream
On 24.03.23 19:52, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> As a follow-up of the previous patch modifying the documentation to
> allow using the "Closes:" tag, checkpatch.pl is updated accordingly.
>
> checkpatch.pl now mentions the "Closes:" tag between brackets to express
> the fact it should be used only if
On 15.03.23 18:44, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Since v6.3, checkpatch.pl now complains about the use of "Closes:" tags
> followed by a link [1]. It also complains if a "Reported-by:" tag is
> followed by a "Closes:" one [2].
>
> As detailed in the first patch, this "Closes:" tag is used for a bit of
gt;>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18/02/2023 15:19, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18/02/2023 12:25, Karol Herbst wrote:
>>>>>>>>
On 13.02.23 10:14, Chris Clayton wrote:
> On 13/02/2023 02:57, Dave Airlie wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 at 00:43, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/02/2023 19:33, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>>> On 10.02
On 10.02.23 20:01, Karol Herbst wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 7:35 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
> Leemhuis) wrote:
>>
>> On 08.02.23 09:48, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm assuming that we are not going to see a fix for this regression before
&g
On 08.02.23 09:48, Chris Clayton wrote:
>
> I'm assuming that we are not going to see a fix for this regression before
> 6.2 is released.
Yeah, looks like it. That's unfortunate, but happens. But there is still
time to fix it and there is one thing I wonder:
Did any of the nouveau developers
it in my experience often is best to leave things to the
developers of the code in question, as they know it best and thus have a
better idea which hidden side effect a more complex revert might have.
Ciao, Thorsten
> On 27/01/2023 11:20, Linux kernel regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
>
://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.
#regzbot poke
On 19.01.23 15:33, Linux kernel regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
wrote:
> [adding various lists and the two other nouveau maintainers to the list
> of reci
On 27.01.23 08:39, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 11:51:04AM -0600, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
>> On 1/20/2023 11:46, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 04:50:44PM +0800, Wayne Lin wrote:
This reverts commit 4d07b0bc403403438d9cf88450506240c5faf92f.
[Why]
[adding various lists and the two other nouveau maintainers to the list
of recipients]
For the rest of this mail:
[TLDR: I'm adding this report to the list of tracked Linux kernel
regressions; the text you find below is based on a few templates
paragraphs you might have encountered already in
[CCing Daniel]
On 05.01.23 13:28, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [adding Karol and Lyude to the list of recipients]
>
> On 28.12.22 15:49, Diogo Ivo wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Commit 2541626cfb79 breaks GM20B probe with
>> the following kernel log:
> Just wondering: i
[adding Karol and Lyude to the list of recipients]
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. Top-posting for once,
to make this easily accessible to everyone.
On 28.12.22 15:49, Diogo Ivo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Commit 2541626cfb79 breaks GM20B probe with
> the following kernel log:
Just
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
On 18.12.22 14:28, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
>
> The kernel 6.2 preparation cycle has begun.
> And after the kernel was updated on my Fedora Rawhide I started
> receiving use-after-free errors with complete computer hangs.
> At least a good
[Note: this mail contains only information for Linux kernel regression
tracking. Mails like these contain '#forregzbot' in the subject to make
then easy to spot and filter out. The author also tried to remove most
or all individuals from the list of recipients to spare them the hassle.]
On
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. The relevant code here
is not my area of expertise, nevertheless a few questions:
On 21.12.22 03:23, Kaiwan N Billimoria wrote:
> [REGRESSION] ?
> Testing with 6.1, I find the same issue - VirtualBox VMs seem to hang
> on boot, though the kernel
On 13.11.22 11:23, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
> regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
> most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
> like a m
On 20.11.22 18:25, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> [Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
> regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
> most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
> like a m
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker.
On 13.11.22 14:28, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Hi Caleb,
>
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2022 at 18:30, Caleb Connolly
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch has caused a regression on 6.1-rc for some devices that use
>> DSI panels. The new behaviour results in
[Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
like a mailing lists. These mails usually contain '#forregzbot' in the
subject, to
, to make them easy to spot and filter out.]
On 19.09.22 11:10, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>
> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org. As many (most?)
> kernel developer don't keep an eye on it, I decided to forward it by
> mail. Quoting from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/sho
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. Top-posting for once,
to make this easily accessible to everyone.
Christian, was any progress made to address this? It looks stalled sine
10+ days, as I looked for posts and commits that referenced this report,
but couldn't find anything.
Ciao,
[Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
like a mailing lists. These mails usually contain '#forregzbot' in the
subject, to
Hi! Thx for the reply.
On 24.10.22 12:26, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Am 23.10.22 um 10:04 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis:
>>
>> I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org. As many (most?)
>> kernel developer don't keep an eye on it, I decided to forward it by
>&g
[Note: this mail is primarily send for documentation purposes and/or for
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot. That's why I removed
most or all folks from the list of recipients, but left any that looked
like a mailing lists. These mails usually contain '#forregzbot' in the
subject, to
Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.
I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org. As many (most?)
kernel developer don't keep an eye on it, I decided to forward it by
mail. Quoting from https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216616 :
> Andreas 2022-10-22
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
