similar to: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/nv50: Reclock when memory was stolen

This is more or less simplified series of patches that bring power usage on my NV86 close to that of binary blob. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky

Fixes crash during reclocking. Call Trace: pll_calc == NULL calc_pll calc_mclk nv50_pm_clocks_pre nouveau_pm_perflvl_set nouveau_pm_trigger nouveau_pm_profile_set nouveau_pm_set_perflvl dev_attr_store sysfs_write_file vfs_write sys_write system_call_fastpath Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz at gmail.com> --- It's weird nobody noticed this... nva3+ code does

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66176 Priority: medium Bug ID: 66176 Assignee: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org Summary: nouveau.perflvl kernel parameter doesn't work QA Contact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Severity: normal Classification: Unclassified OS: All Reporter: mr.dash.four at

Hello all, this series includes a wide range of fixes - from a few month's old one-liners from Andreas Heider regarding vga_switcheroo, via a null pointer dereference and double memory allocation, to a buffer overflow. Please review and comment --- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 3 ++- drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_device.c | 26 +++++++++++++++-----------

Following a series of patches to improve nouveaus clock tree parsing. Reclocking these engines (all but memory) is pretty stable on the cards I've tested. Please review and merge when approved. These patches do not solve the problem that core/shader engine doesn't like to be clocked up too far without fb following, with visible corruption as a result. I suspect this problem is unrelated

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68768 Priority: medium Bug ID: 68768 Assignee: nouveau at lists.freedesktop.org Summary: [nv50] error during boot QA Contact: xorg-team at lists.x.org Severity: normal Classification: Unclassified OS: Linux (All) Reporter: mattia.b89 at gmail.com

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Pierre Moreau <pierre.morrow at free.fr> wrote: > (This is a v3 of patch "drm/nouveau/fb/nv50: Add PFB writes") > > This fix a GPU lockup on 9400M (NVAC) when using acceleration, see > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27501 > > v2: > - Move code to subdev/fb/nv50.c as suggested by Roy Spliet; > - Remove arbitrary

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb at gmail.com> wrote: > On 17 May 2014 02:43, "Ilia Mirkin" <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> >> Adds a NvReclock boolean option to allow the user to enable (or disable) >> reclocking. All chipsets default to off, except NVAA/NVAC, which are >> reportedly complete. > Hey Ilia, > > I

Am Samstag, den 01.02.2014, 12:16 +0900 schrieb Alexandre Courbot: > Add a clumsy-but-working FB support for GK20A. This chip only uses system > memory, so we allocate a big chunk using CMA and let the existing memory > managers work on it. > > A better future design would be to allocate objects directly from system > memory without having to suffer from the limitations of a

Hi, This is my work in documenting EVO. I did some RE to fill missing gaps. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43668 Bug #: 43668 Summary: Secondary monitor always in standby on dual head NV94 Classification: Unclassified Product: xorg Version: unspecified Platform: x86-64 (AMD64) OS/Version: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:54 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb at gmail.com> wrote: > On 17 May 2014 13:39, "Ilia Mirkin" <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Ben Skeggs <skeggsb at gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 17 May 2014 02:43, "Ilia Mirkin" <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote: >> >> >>

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93405 Bug ID: 93405 Summary: nouveau: Xorg crashes sooner or later in 3840x2160 mode Product: xorg Version: git Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) OS: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: major Priority: medium Component:

My wife's Windows XP laptop was stolen a couple days ago. Every night the computer automatically preforms an rsync to a Debian Linux computer (the dumb-dumbs didn't steal that). My question: if the laptop successfully connects to the Linux box can you think of anyway I can use this fact to track the computer (maybe an IP address from its location., etc.)? By they way I could really care

gday gurus, could someone please help me with this one? Can't find it in the doco. summary of my lm object gives "Pr(>|t|)" but coef doesn't. How do I get hold of these probabilities within an object? There doesn't seem to be an appropriate attribute within the object - I was hoping for something like "my.lm$probabilies". I was hoping to grab the best t

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95044 Bug ID: 95044 Summary: [NVA0] [Reclocking] GPU doesn't relax memory clocks Product: xorg Version: unspecified Hardware: x86-64 (AMD64) OS: Linux (All) Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: medium Component: Driver/nouveau

The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine, since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long period of time. While it would be unlikely for a guest domain to be denied timer interrupts for over 10s, it could happen and any softlockup message would be completely spurious. Earlier I proposed that sched_clock() return time in unstolen nanoseconds, which

The softlockup watchdog is currently a nuisance in a virtual machine, since the whole system could have the CPU stolen from it for a long period of time. While it would be unlikely for a guest domain to be denied timer interrupts for over 10s, it could happen and any softlockup message would be completely spurious. Earlier I proposed that sched_clock() return time in unstolen nanoseconds, which

The current Linux scheduler makes one big assumption: that 1ms of CPU time is the same as any other 1ms of CPU time, and that therefore a process makes the same amount of progress regardless of which particular ms of time it gets. This assumption is wrong now, and will become more wrong as virtualization gets more widely used. It's wrong now, because it fails to take into account of several

The current Linux scheduler makes one big assumption: that 1ms of CPU time is the same as any other 1ms of CPU time, and that therefore a process makes the same amount of progress regardless of which particular ms of time it gets. This assumption is wrong now, and will become more wrong as virtualization gets more widely used. It's wrong now, because it fails to take into account of several