<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Reverse Prime with intel/amdgpu causes segfault in glamor_block_handler when enabling monitor" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103613#c7">Comment # 7</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Reverse Prime with intel/amdgpu causes segfault in glamor_block_handler when enabling monitor" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103613">bug 103613</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:EoD@xmw.de" title="EoD <EoD@xmw.de>"> EoD</a> <pre>(In reply to Michel Dänzer from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103613#c6">comment #6</a>) > (In reply to EoD from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103613#c5">comment #5</a>) > > The patch avoids the crash, but the 2ndary screen does not change. It just > > stays active (power LED is on) with a blank screen. > > Does that only happen when using xf86-video-intel for the Intel GPU, or also > when using modesetting? If the former, it sounds like a separate issue in > xf86-video-intel. With and w/o the patch, there no problems when I use modesetting instead of xf86-video-intel. Does this mean it's clearly an Intel issue now? Even w/o the patch? I also asked on IRC and more or less these lines were the last ones regarding the issue: 20:55 ickle: I wasn't expecting 0 21:21 ickle: more perplexing, we don't use screen->devPrivates 21:22 ickle: amdgpu_glamor_flush() is flushing the wrong pScrn 21:23 ickle: amdgpu's screen/scrn is 0xd66150/0xbfad60, the one it pasted to glamor is 0xbfc650/0xd4fa10 I think the "expecting 0" is a "expecting 0 for glamor_priv".</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>