[ubuntu-x] Kernel Call for Testing(CFT): DRM stack

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Stefan Bader
<stefan.bader at canonical.com> wrote:
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Bryce Harrington <bryce at canonical.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:14:30PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>>> The patches in question are for radeon KMS, and as I was told this was
>>>> only recently fixed on 2.6.34-rc4, I'll review the git log on that
>>>> stuff, see if I can cherry pick some patches out. I'm not highly
>>>> motivated to do this though as things are working with a newer kernel
>>>> and I'm happy to use it but if I have some time maybe I will, I can
>>>> see this being useful for others.
>>> Alright, well I haven't seen any other complaints (at least, there's no
>>> bug reports I'm aware of) so it's not an issue on my radar.  Again
>>> though, since the patch sounds like it's in the kernel drm, this seems
>>> to be something the kernel team would need to be made aware of.
>>
>> Kernel team -- Just a heads up, I've tested Ubuntu 10.04 x86 beta2 on
>> my system with ATI RV770 [Radeon HD 4870], it worked fine with 3d and
>> HDMI video but HDMI audio did not work. I last reviewed HDMI support
>> for these suckers and I was expecting this to be fixed last on the
>> kernel since the HDMI code would be added for the radeon KMS. After
>> installing 10.04 I then upgraded to 2.6.34-rc4 and my audio now works
>> over HDMI.
>>
>> Brynce has suggested if I can look for the patches and see if you guys
>> might consider merging for an SRU onto the Lucid kernel. If you guys
>> are interested I might be up for reviewing this, otherwise I won't
>> even bother as I'm personally happy running 2.6.34.
>>
>>   Luis
>>
> It depends just on how much (in size and complexity) this will turn out. I will
> be open to it if it is not too scary. So interested, yes but if you find on your
> way that this comes closer to a 2.6.34 backport than a bug fix you should not
> flagellate yourself too much to go into more depth.
>
> Does that sound reasonable?

Yeah, reasonable, I frankly don't expect this to be a trivial change
so was not counting on it, hit you guys up based on Cryce's
suggestion. Will let you know.

  Luis