Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 18 Mar 2022 06:43:10 +0100 | Subject | Re: [REGRESSION] Too-low frequency limit for AMD GPU PCI-passed-through to Windows VM | From | Paul Menzel <> |
| |
Dear Thorsten, dear James,
Am 17.03.22 um 13:54 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis: > On 13.03.22 19:33, James Turner wrote: >> >>> My understanding at this point is that the root problem is probably >>> not in the Linux kernel but rather something else (e.g. the machine >>> firmware or AMD Windows driver) and that the change in f9b7f3703ff9 >>> ("drm/amdgpu/acpi: make ATPX/ATCS structures global (v2)") simply >>> exposed the underlying problem. > > FWIW: that in the end is irrelevant when it comes to the Linux kernel's > 'no regressions' rule. For details see: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.rst > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/Documentation/process/handling-regressions.rst > > That being said: sometimes for the greater good it's better to not > insist on that. And I guess that might be the case here.
But who decides that? Running stuff in a virtual machine is not that uncommon.
Should the commit be reverted, and re-added with a more elaborate commit message documenting the downsides?
Could the user be notified somehow? Can PCI passthrough and a loaded amdgpu driver be detected, so Linux warns about this?
Also, should this be documented in the code?
>> I'm not sure where to go from here. This issue isn't much of a concern >> for me anymore, since blacklisting `amdgpu` works for my machine. At >> this point, my understanding is that the root problem needs to be fixed >> in AMD's Windows GPU driver or Dell's firmware, not the Linux kernel. If >> any of the AMD developers on this thread would like to forward it to the >> AMD Windows driver team, I'd be happy to work with AMD to fix the issue >> properly.
(Thorsten, your mailer mangled the quote somehow – I reformatted it –, which is too bad, as this message is shown when clicking on the link *marked invalid* in the regzbot Web page [1]. (The link is a very nice feature.)
> In that case I'll drop it from the list of regressions, unless what I > wrote above makes you change your mind. > > #regzbot invalid: firmware issue exposed by kernel change, user seems to > be happy with a workaround > > Thx everyone who participated in handling this.
Should the regression issue be re-opened until the questions above are answered, and a more user friendly solution is found?
Kind regards,
Paul
[1]: https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/resolved/
| |