00:45 <steev> comment out line 2549 in drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_rx.c ?

00:54 <steev> fwiw, it's https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218005 upstream bug, but kalle hasn't replied in the bug at all, unfortunately

01:07 <craftyguy> Ya patching the kernel is kinda lame, and I have the upstream bug bookmarked already 😅

01:09 <craftyguy> if I wanted to debug the bug/thing causing this msg to be printed in the kernel, I haven't got the slightest clue where to begin

01:18 <steev> 802.11 spec

01:23 <steev> or possibly in #linux-wireless on librechat

01:24 <steev> my understanding is that whatever sets it, it should be a 1 and its a 0

14:35 <freekurt[m]> New x13s camera related patch series was submitted upstream https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241025-b4-linux-next-24-10-25-camss-dts-fixups-v1-0-cdff2f1a5792@linaro.org/

14:41 <robclark> bryanodonoghue: if softisp does not require cma (but could use udmabuf, etc) could we not declare CMA heaps in dts? Software shenanigans should end up in dtb

15:06 <steev> freekurt[m]: those are cleanups and shouldn't affect things (removing a line that isn't referenced anywhere)

15:07 <freekurt[m]> steev: oh ok! thanks for the explaination!

15:07 <steev> fwiw, i do have them in my local tree :)

15:07 <steev> i've just been busy with trying to get cloud init to do what i want it to do so haven't pushed anything recently

17:44 <kuruczgy[m]> Does anyone know if anything special is needed to get `DRM_PANIC_SCREEN_QR_CODE` working? I applied https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/20241003230734.653717-1-ojeda@kernel.org to be able to compile the kernel with it, but on `echo c > /proc/sysrq-trigger` the screen just freezes, I don't get a QR code.

18:16 <robclark> I guess there is some driver work needed, but I've not had a chance to look at it yet.. idk if lumag or abhinav have maybe?

21:10 <steveej[m]> Kieran Bingham: i reverted to stable nixos because pulseaudio/pipewire didn't work properly. i'm seeing this issue: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/351842 most likely this is nixos specific

21:14 <abby> seems like a nix issue, i've not seen this with pw/wp/libcamera on void

21:22 <KieranBingham[m]> <steveej[m]> "Kieran Bingham: i reverted to..." <- I suspect your package system is stripping the binaries and not resigning.

21:22 <steveej[m]> i'll wait until nixos 24.11 and then reattempt :-) at that point i'll get libcamera 0.3.1 without having to recompile anything

21:24 <KieranBingham[m]> https://github.com/kbingham/linux-cameras/wiki/Packaging-and-Distribution-of-libcamera#ipa-signatures and in particular follow the links to how other distros handle packaging

21:25 <steveej[m]> Kieran Bingham: yes a user named "steinuil" also discovered that regression in nixpkgs. there's a fix for it: https://github.com/NixOS/nixos-hardware/issues/1208#issuecomment-2441912544 i might try again with this

21:26 <steveej[m]> some day i'll use the camera on the x13s for sure :-D

21:32 <kuruczgy[m]> steveej: If you only need a new libcamera, why not just grab only that from unstable nixpkgs using an overlay? You don't need a newer nixos.

21:49 <steveej[m]> kuruczgy: pulling in libcamera via an overlay causes a mass rebuild. it's not the same as replacing a `.so` file on the filesystem.

21:50 <KieranBingham[m]> Why a mass rebuild? What's marked as dependant on it?

21:50 <steev> because nixos

21:50 <steev> probably pipewire

21:50 <KieranBingham[m]> I'm guessing it's because of pipewire ... But in reality, pipewire gives this a stable interface as the pipewire spa interface is stable ....

21:51 <steev> freekurt[m]: btw, that patchset is up to v4 now, and it looks like the sc8280xp portion is dropped

21:52 <steev> oh wait no it isn't, that's a different patchset, disregard

21:52 <steveej[m]> maybe i could use a hack and set LD_PRELOAD in pipewire service with the newer libcamera. that would avoid the mass-rebuild

21:52 <steveej[m]> probably going off-topic now for this channel

21:53 <steev> not really

21:55 <KieranBingham[m]> I'm not sure if ldpreload is the right tool there? But you need to make sure the libcamera and libcamera-spa are binary compatible. 0.3.x is fine to change. But if you're current version is 0.2.x that's not. Also you can't use a compilation from libcamera master as that's really 0.4.0 now

21:55 <KieranBingham[m]> I wonder if the pipewire spa could build multiple versions in packaging ... No idea how that would work for distros though

22:07 <kuruczgy[m]> (Yeah I now see that you are right, pipewire depends on libcamera, and many things depend on pipewire, so yeah probably a lot of rebuilds.)

22:29 <KieranBingham[m]> Yes, but it shouldn't (need to) :-(

23:20 <kuruczgy[m]> This is the way nix works, it needs to rebuild the whole dependent chain if something changed. It accepts the cost of sometimes unnecessary rebuilds in exchange for guaranteed no breakages.