> > On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:30:05 -0700
bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
> >
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8187
> >
> > Summary: 2.6.20 "PCI: Quirks" patch breaks X11 on I82801
> > Kernel Version: 2.6.20
> > Status: NEW
> > Severity: normal
> > Owner:
greg@kroah.com
> > Submitter:
ktk@bigfoot.com
> >
> >
> > Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur:
> > Any 2.6.20-pre prior to commit 368c73d4f689dae0807d0a2aa74c61fd2b9b075f
> >
> > Distribution: Slackware 11.0
> > Hardware Environment: HP/Compaq dc5000S (P4, 82801, 82865)
> > Software Environment: Xorg 6.9.0
> > Problem Description:
> >
> > Alan Cox introduced a "PCI: Quirks" patch (git commit
> > 368c73d4f689dae0807d0a2aa74c61fd2b9b075f) in 2.6.20 that breaks X11 on this
> > I82801 platform. Specifically, it causes the PCI initialisation to become
> > buggered; Xorg 6.9.0 dumps the following to the console:
> > (EE) end of block range 0x177 < begin 0x3f0
> > (EE) end of block range 0x177 < begin 0x3f0
> > (WW) ****INVALID IO ALLOCATION**** b: 0x14d0 e: 0x14d7 correcting
> > [...]
> > Backtrace:
> > 0: X(xf86SigHandler+0x8a) [0x8088b2a]
> > 1: [0xb7f2b420]
> > 2: /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/drivers/i810_drv.so [0xb797f592]
> > 3: X(InitOutput+0xb83) [0x8072713]
> > 4: X(main+0x226) [0x80d4496]
> > 5: /lib/tls/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xd4) [0xb7da7e14]
> > 6: X [0x806ff61]
> >
> > Fatal server error:
> > Caught signal 11. Server aborting
> >
> > Steps to reproduce:
> >
> > Reverting the git commit mentioned above fixes the issue. Apparently, this may
> > be limited to certain combinations of on-motherboard chipsets, as I haven't seen
> > many bug reports. Googling shows some people having X11 segfault issues with
> > 2.6.20 (e.g. freedesktop.org bug #9956) but in most of those cases it's due to
> > the evdev driver and not PCI initialisation.
> >
> > I wrote to Alan (cc'ed Greg as he signed off on the patch) nearly two weeks ago
> > but have heard nothing, so I'm leaving a bug here instead.
> >
>
> argh.
>
> Would we break more machines than we fix if we just revert that?
