On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:27:31 +0100, Michel Dänzer <daenzer@debian.org> wrote: > On Die, 2011-03-01 at 22:22 +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote: > > How about the attached patches (against current unstable)? On the server > > side, they add an EXA_REQUIRES_UPLOAD_DOWNLOAD flag, which ignores options > > deactivating UTS and DFS with a warning in the logs; on the driver side, > > they state that r600 requires UTS and DFS. I imagine radeon_exa_funcs.c > > and evergreen_exa.c would need a similar patch, [...] > > Indeed, they would. > > I can't help feeling this is overkill. Why did you set these options in > the first place? According to my VCS logs I must have set them while investigating the corruption problem which I ended up reporting as http://bugs.debian.org/573231 (which was a kernel bug). Unfortunately I forgot to remove them... > A simpler solution might be to put a warning in the log file if any of > these options are used, reminding of the manpage bit about them only > being intended for debugging purposes, and adding that they might cause > any kind of problems. Right, that would be simpler and more generic. I do know though that if I have the choice between a system which crashes (even with a helpful log message) and one which doesn't, I prefer the former! I realise that given that these options aren't meant to be used in general, handling them specifically can seem overkill; but I've seen them mentioned a lot in various forums, so who knows how many users have them in their configuration file... > Anyway, some technical comments on the patches below. If you still feel > they are necessary, please post them individually (e.g. as a series with > git send-email) to the xorg-devel@lists.freedesktop.org list for review. OK, I'll do that, thanks for the review! Regards, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature