On 20/04/2023 12:02, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
[...]
Which "one" are you referring to here?
confused,
greg k-h
This one, sent in this email thread.
I don't have "this email thread" anymore, remember, some of us get thousand+ emails a day...
I don't really understand the issue to be honest, we are talking in the very email thread! The email was sent April/18, it's not old or anything.
But in any case, for reference, this is the original email from the lore archives: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20230418221522.1287942-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com/
The title of the patch is "drm/amdgpu/vcn: Disable indirect SRAM on Vangogh broken BIOSes", target is 6.1.y and (one of the) upstream hash(es) is 542a56e8eb44 heh
But that commit says it fixes a problem in the 6.2 tree, why is this relevant for 6.1.y?
That is explained in the email and the very reason for that, is the duplicate hashes we are discussing here.
The fix commit in question points the "Fixes:" tag to 82132ecc5432 ("drm/amdgpu: enable Vangogh VCN indirect sram mode"), which appears to be in 6.2 tree, right?
But notice that 9a8cc8cabc1e ("drm/amdgpu: enable Vangogh VCN indirect sram mode") is the *same* offender and..is present on 6.1 !
In other words, when I first wrote this fix, I just checked the tree quickly and came up with "Fixes: 82132ecc5432", but to be thorough, I should have pointed the fixes tag to 9a8cc8cabc1e, to pick it on 6.1.y.
tl;dr: the offender is present on 6.1.y, but this fix is not, hence I'm hereby requesting the merge. Some backport/context adjustment was necessary and it was properly tested in the Steam Deck.
Thanks,
Guilherme