Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Jesse Barnes
Date: Monday, May 5, 2008 - 8:57 am

On Sunday, May 04, 2008 12:10 am Frans Pop wrote:

I suspect an i810 driver bug is being uncovered here, since we do have 
transient VT switch corruption on some other platforms (we're just exposing 
our chip reprogramming on the screen, rather than keeping it off the whole 
time).  But there could also be something PAT specific going on, I'll have to 
walk through those code paths...


Oh the messages should be removed or somehow minimized, I agree.  I'm just not 
sure if the other bug is serious enough to block PAT by default yet, but 
either way we should fix the bugs!


Thanks for your help so far...

Jesse
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Frans Pop, (Fri May 2, 12:22 pm)
RE: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Fri May 2, 12:37 pm)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Jesse Barnes, (Fri May 2, 1:40 pm)
RE: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Fri May 2, 2:55 pm)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Jesse Barnes, (Fri May 2, 3:07 pm)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Ingo Molnar, (Sun May 4, 2:04 am)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Jesse Barnes, (Mon May 5, 8:57 am)
RE: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Mon May 5, 10:00 am)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Yinghai Lu, (Mon May 5, 10:42 am)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Jesse Barnes, (Mon May 5, 10:45 am)
RE: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Mon May 5, 10:59 am)
Re: fb layer & ioremap_wc, Jesse Barnes, (Mon May 5, 12:04 pm)
Re: [git head] Should X86_PAT really default to yes?, Venki Pallipadi, (Tue May 6, 3:42 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Ingo Molnar, (Wed May 7, 12:02 am)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Hugh Dickins, (Wed May 7, 12:18 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Venki Pallipadi, (Wed May 7, 3:36 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Venki Pallipadi, (Wed May 7, 4:23 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Ingo Molnar, (Fri May 9, 3:08 am)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Venki Pallipadi, (Fri May 9, 1:05 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Venki Pallipadi, (Fri May 9, 1:09 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Hugh Dickins, (Fri May 9, 1:48 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Dave Airlie, (Fri May 9, 3:11 pm)
RE: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Fri May 9, 3:20 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Keith Packard, (Fri May 9, 10:45 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Dave Airlie, (Fri May 9, 11:19 pm)
Re: [git head] X86_PAT & mprotect, Keith Packard, (Fri May 9, 11:29 pm)