i915 fix in which kernel version?

[marinheiro]

I just upgraded my old macbook from an old kernel to 3.10.7. Now I'm suffering from this bug:

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60021

I'm wondering whether to go back to a 3.8 kernel or to wait for the fix to reach 3.10, but don't anything about kernel stuff - since it appears Intel have a patch, how can I know when this patch is likely to get officially applied and when it is, how long it will take to reach gentoo? And which sub-version it is in?

Thanks for any advice

Graham

[TomWij]

As stable is CC-ed I guess it won't take too long, wait for at least the next two weeks.

[graysky]

Can you compile from git?
_________________
Zsh and other configs

[TomWij]

Eh, scratch that, I didn't note the date of the last comments; it appears to already be in v3.11 (present since v3.11-rc7).

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/commit/?id=63b66e5ba54b15a6592be00555d762db6db739ce

$ git tag --contains 63b66e5ba54b15a6592be00555d762db6db739ce
v3.11
v3.11-rc7
v3.11.1
v3.11.2
v3.11.3
v3.11.4
v3.11.5
v3.12-rc1
v3.12-rc2
v3.12-rc3
v3.12-rc4
v3.12-rc5

I've tried to apply this to v3.10.17 but it appears that half of the patch fails.

# git checkout --force v3.10.17
Previous HEAD position was 7fc8781... Linux 3.10.16
HEAD is now at 14e9c7d... Linux 3.10.17
# patch -p1 < 63b66e5ba54b15a6592be00555d762db6db739ce.patch
patching file drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 10042.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 10050.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 9569 (offset -502 lines).
Hunk #4 succeeded at 9589 (offset -502 lines).
Hunk #5 FAILED at 10110.
Hunk #6 succeeded at 9630 with fuzz 1 (offset -506 lines).
Hunk #7 FAILED at 10176.
Hunk #8 succeeded at 9692 with fuzz 2 (offset -520 lines).
4 out of 8 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c.rej

I will consider to backport this for the next version, it depends on how much the difference between v3.10 and v3.11 for that code is;
if it is minor, it can be backported, if it is major patching will break it and it won't be easy to backport due to the dependencies on other v3.11 commits.

[marinheiro]

If you could add a note to this thread when you reach a conclusion about the backport?

Thanks for investigating -- and for all the work you do to keep gentoo going

Graham

[TomWij]

Missed 3.10.25, this backported patch will be part of 3.10.26.