[00:41] <bryce_> jbarnes, there's a perf regression on -intel 2.9.0 - bug 24537
[00:44] <jbarnes> bryce_: sounds like fun...
[00:54] <dmandell> bryce_: Is there anything in particular you'd like me to do to further diagnose the problem?
[00:55] <dmandell> Are you able to reproduce it yourself?
[00:55] <bryce_> dmandell, since you know that version 2.8.1 works, this suggests that git bisection would be effective at narrowing in on which change introduced the regression
[00:55] <bryce_> dmandell, if you're game I can give you a link on how to do this
[00:56] <bryce_> (it'll require rebuilding -intel and a series of X restarts)
[00:56] <dmandell> bryce_:  Sure, the caveat is that I'm unavailable until about 10pm tonight because I have an art class.
[00:56] <dmandell> If you want to email me instructions on what I need to do, I'd be glad to do it once I get home.
[00:56] <bryce_> dmandell, ok, I'll be around then, give me a ping
[00:57] <bryce_> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/X/Bisecting
[00:57] <dmandell> Let me take a look at it quickly and see if I have any questions.
[00:58] <dmandell> How much of a pain will it be to get everything back to normal once I'm done?
[00:58] <dmandell> I use the laptop for work, so it would need to be available for my use tomorrow during the day.
[00:59] <bryce_> dmandell, should be a matter of just reinstalling xserver-xorg-video-intel
[00:59] <dmandell> Ok, cool.
[07:26] <ScottK> Since the latest xserver-xorg-video-intel I've been having trouble with screen locks on my Dell Latitude D430 (this is on Kubuntu Karmic).  For other reasons ubuntu-bug is broken on KDE right now, so I'll report the bug tomorrow.  Currently every time I close the lid and the screen blanks it will not come back on.
[07:42] <bryce_> ScottK, um... that is the patch that you'd asked me to put in earlier.  Have you changed your mind?  ;-)
[08:45] <tseliot> bryce_: I've marked bug #365943 as fixed
[08:46] <bryce_> thanks
[08:48] <bryce_> tseliot, I made a list of X packages with patches and have been going through and reviewing them the past few days
[08:48] <tseliot> bryce_: excellent
[08:49] <bryce_> tseliot, I noticed a number of bugs in -synaptics, -nvidia, and -evdev where you had done a patch, or someone else had done one and you commented, but it was a bit ambiguous whether I should pull the patch or wait
[08:49] <bryce_> so mostly I opted for the latter
[08:49] <bryce_> it would be great if in LL we could get all those resolved
[08:49] <bryce_> tseliot, if you were to update the bug reports and simply say, "please pull this patch" then I could take care of the rest
[08:51] <bryce_> tseliot, if you will be at UDS, I bet you and I could just spend an hour and go through them all.  Will you be at Dallas?
[08:51] <tseliot> bryce_: do you have any bug numbers I can have a look at?
[08:51] <bryce_> sure
[08:51] <bryce_> one sec
[08:52] <tseliot> bryce_: no, unfortunately I won't be there (personal reasons) but I'll participate from home
[08:55] <bryce_> tseliot, http://people.canonical.com/~bryce/patches.html
[08:56] <bryce_> I've whittled that list down from what it was but it's still longer than it should be
[08:57] <tseliot> bryce_: nice
[08:57] <bryce_> tseliot, if a bug report is still valid, but the patch that was attached to it is not valid, what I've been doing is editing the attachment and remove the [x] patch checkmark.  That's sufficient to get it off this list.
[08:58] <bryce_> tjaalton, ^^ you might find this report of interest as well
[08:58] <tseliot> bryce_: ah, ok so removing a patch will do it
[09:04] <bryce_> btw the list does not update itself automatically (at least not yet), due to the huge number of bugs it has to process.  But I can update it manually as needed.
[09:13] <tseliot> good to know. It's still better than having to look for patches manually on launchpad
[09:14] <bryce_> yeah it is good for finding patches in packages I don't often look at
[11:25] <ScottK> bryce_: Maybe.
[11:26] <ScottK> It may be something else because it only seems to be after lid close/open.
[11:33] <bryce_> ScottK, try downgrading to the previous -intel and reproducing
[11:33] <ScottK> bryce_: I will.
[11:36] <ScottK> bryce_: I'll be offline most of today, so I'll report back tonight.
[11:38] <bryce_> ScottK, as you wish
[14:30] <CShadowRun> i just confirmed and added a workaround for my first ubuntu-x bug \o/
[15:40] <apw> tseliot, which of the settings daemon and the config deamon are responsible for suspend initiation?
[15:40] <tseliot> apw: what are you trying to do?
[15:42] <apw> find out who to blame if one suspends on ac then removes ac and resumes then the machine resuspends ... from the pm-utils logs it is being asked to suspend 2x times
[15:42] <apw> so its something above pm-utils i want to blame for the bug :)
[15:43] <apw> perhaps devicekit-power 
[15:43] <tseliot> apw: it could be. You might want to ask pitti about it
[15:43] <apw> tseliot, yeah thanks
[15:44] <tseliot> np
[15:44] <superm1> apw, ah that's the scenario that's causing it?  it's been annoying the heck out of me, but seemed so "random"! :)
[15:45] <apw> yeha was random to me also ... but someone on a kernel bug worked out the 100% trigger
[15:45] <apw> very very rare 1 in 20
[15:45] <apw> now i can get it all the time :)
[16:02] <apw> tseliot, confirming your dell 10v dead strip of touchpad is applying auto now
[16:02] <tseliot> apw: great, it's good to know that it works well
[16:22] <apw> superm1, that double suspend is bug #425411 ... working it with pitti
[16:22] <superm1> cool thanks
[21:07] <tjaalton> bug 452296.. wtf?
[21:11] <jcristau> pointless bug of the day
[21:15] <tjaalton> something like that
[22:36] <ScottK> bryce_: Intel driver is off the hook.  I downgraded and still had the problem.  Thanks for the suggestion.
[23:13] <tormod> bryce: mesa: I wonder how you got 109_revert-dma-reuse.patch to apply :) it patches the same file 4 times through symlinks. I am not sure quilt is good at symlinks.
[23:16] <tormod> oh I get it, because I am trying on git tree with symlinks, and the orig.tar.gz has already dereferenced them
[23:17] <bryce_> tormod, right yeah that was a pain
[23:17] <tormod> confused the hell out of me for a while !
[23:17] <bryce_> I had to hand-edit the patch to remove the stuff for the symlinked files
[23:17] <bryce_> dunno if there's an easier way
[23:18] <tormod> well you had to add the stuff, not remove, right?
[23:23] <bryce_> I had to remove, otherwise the patch didn't apply
[23:27] <tormod> to apply on a git tree yes, but in the diff.gz patch it needs to be four-fold
[23:28] <tormod> I added this patch to the x-updates snapshot, seems like upstream are not exactly rushing to fix this
[23:35] <bryce_> do we need to fix the patch in karmic?
[23:43] <tormod> bryce_, no it is fine, it is four-fold -> works with orig.tar.gz
[23:49] <bryce_> ok cool