http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 Jean Delvare changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://bugzilla.kernel.org | |/show_bug.cgi?id=81711 --- Comment #1 from Jean Delvare --- I think this corresponds to upstream kernel bug #81711. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 Takashi Iwai changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tiwai@suse.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 Jean Delvare changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jdelvare@suse.com Flags| |needinfo?(jdelvare@suse.com | |) --- Comment #3 from Jean Delvare --- (In reply to Egbert Eich from comment #2)

(...) have you tried a SLE12 kernel on this?

Not yet, but I can do that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 --- Comment #5 from Takashi Iwai --- This is highly likely the effect of the commit in 3.14 kernel: commit fc2c807b7a2b2ca8dbe2aed2f5ae730c19beeda5 drm/i915: Make underruns DRM_ERROR This replaces the underrun reporting from DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER() to DRM_ERROR(). And I bet that the underrun itself exited since long time ago but was never shown as an error until this change. That said, it's no real regression, can be mostly ignored for an end user (unless you really see something wrong :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 --- Comment #7 from Egbert Eich --- The Intel driver is full of WARN_ONs which indicate inconsistencies which don't seem to matter in real life. Still they produce backtraces which alarm users and make them report L3 bugs. I've asked Intel in Bordeaux to make those messages configurable but they did not want to do that. I did spend quite some time fixing some of the issues I had seen or I had been made aware of. I'm afraid however that FIFO underruns are beyond what I can do - I don't have detailed documentations on watermarks and their tunings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 --- Comment #9 from Jean Delvare --- Hmmm, no, with "drm/i915: Make underruns DRM_ERROR" as the top commit, I do not get the underrun error messages. So it seems that the problem was introduced later. Looks like I'm up for a full bisection. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 Jean Delvare changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(jdelvare@suse.com | |) | --- Comment #11 from Jean Delvare --- I bisected this issue and here are my results. First of all, there are two sets of error messages to consider: the one from i9xx_set_fifo_underrun_reporting, and the rest. The error message from i9xx_set_fifo_underrun_reporting appeared with commit e69abff0d6794311d834de0fa2f188eb24a977b9 ("drm/i915: Check for FIFO underuns when disabling reporting on gmch platforms" in v3.16.) This commit is merely adding detection and reporting of the error condition, so this is not a regression per se. The other messages appeared with commit fc2c807b7a2b2ca8dbe2aed2f5ae730c19beeda5 ("drm/i915: Make underruns DRM_ERROR" in v3.15.) Again this commit is only making the reporting of the error conditions unconditional, so this is not a regression per se. As a summary, the underruns have always been there, just they were not reported as errors before. I admit I find it strange that messages that were reported at debug level before were suddenly considered so important that they needed to be reported at error level. I understand that the driver developers wanted to see these messages without having to turn debugging on, but I believe that info level would be more appropriate. The reason why I am suggesting that is that these early error messages kill the nice splash screen at boot time, while info messages would not. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 --- Comment #13 from Egbert Eich --- (In reply to Jean Delvare from comment #11)

I admit I find it strange that messages that were reported at debug level before were suddenly considered so important that they needed to be reported at error level. I understand that the driver developers wanted to see these messages without having to turn debugging on, but I believe that info level would be more appropriate. The reason why I am suggesting that is that these early error messages kill the nice splash screen at boot time, while info messages would not.

This is true and I talked about that to the Intel folks on XDC. What annoys me even more are the many WARN_ONs which report some mismatches between some expected and true settings. These WAN_ONs generate backtraces which look like oopses to the semi-informed. So many users report kernel Oopses although they have not discovered a real problem. I have fixed some of them myself in the past - mostly when I have actually seen a real issue. Having said this, the platform you are looking at is actually fairly old: i855 came out over 10y ago. The reason that this bug has not been looked at by Intel is that they don't have much interest (and thus want to spend time on this). You may have to look into this yourself if you want to see this fixed in a timely manner. There seem to be 2 reasons for the these messages: 1. Looking at the commit logs there are conditions where spurious underruns may occur. For Gen2 check commit: 4a3436e85ccc2925f4ee7e363131107bb00aab77 People have been working hard to avoid these spurious reports. There may still be cases for older platforms, though as those are not too much in the focus. 2. Watermark values are wrong for the mode you are using. Are you using an external monitor with a higher resolution? Maybe you want to check if these messages go away if you use only the internal display or reduce your external one. If the messages disappear then we have a pretty good indication that this here is what is happening. You could go and play with the WMs. Commit e95a2f7509f5219177d6821a0a8754f93892ca56 may give you some ideas what to do. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 Joschi Brauchle changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |joschibrauchle@gmx.de --- Comment #15 from Joschi Brauchle --- Hi there, we are seeing this: ----------------- kernel: [drm:cpt_set_fifo_underrun_reporting] *ERROR* uncleared pch fifo underrun on pch transcoder A kernel: [drm:cpt_serr_int_handler] *ERROR* PCH transcoder A FIFO underrun ----------------- with a ----------------- 09: PCI 02.0: 0300 VGA compatible controller (VGA) [Created at pci.328] Unique ID: _Znp.B56NdSxIhXD SysFS ID: /devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:02.0 SysFS BusID: 0000:00:02.0 Hardware Class: graphics card Model: "Intel 3rd Gen Core processor Graphics Controller" Vendor: pci 0x8086 "Intel Corporation" Device: pci 0x0166 "3rd Gen Core processor Graphics Controller" SubVendor: pci 0x10cf "Fujitsu Limited." SubDevice: pci 0x16c1 Revision: 0x09 Driver: "i915" Driver Modules: "drm" Memory Range: 0xf0000000-0xf03fffff (rw,non-prefetchable) Memory Range: 0xe0000000-0xefffffff (ro,non-prefetchable) I/O Ports: 0x3000-0x303f (rw) IRQ: 42 (61 events) I/O Ports: 0x3c0-0x3df (rw) Module Alias: "pci:v00008086d00000166sv000010CFsd000016C1bc03sc00i00" Driver Info #0: Driver Status: i915 is active Driver Activation Cmd: "modprobe i915" Config Status: cfg=new, avail=yes, need=no, active=unknown Primary display adapter: #9 ----------------- It is not 100% identical to the reported message in c#1, but possibly its the same 'warning-is-now-considered-error' problem? There are further references here: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=79261 I can open a seperate BZ if needed. Has the mentioned commit b68362278af94e1171f5be9d4e44988601fb0439 been released on 13.2 yet? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=907039 --- Comment #17 from Joschi Brauchle ---

The patch was already backported, but it wno't cover your messages, as these appear even on 3.19 kernel. That implies that it's no help to track this on this bugzilla. Rather report to upstream bugzilla (either freedesktop.org or kernel.org) and track there wiht the latest kernel.

Thanks! Will do. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.