The question is if errors result in blocking further submissions with the same context or not.
In case of a hard reset and potential loss of state we have to kill the context, otherwise a follow up submission would just lockup the hardware once more.
In case of a soft reset I think we can keep the context alive, this way even applications without robustness handling can keep work.
You potentially still get some corruption, but at least not your compositor killed.
Christian.
Am 25.04.23 um 13:07 schrieb Marek
Olšák:
That supposedly depends on the compositor. There may be compositors for very specific cases (e.g. Steam Deck) that handle resets very well, and those would like to be properly notified of all resets because that's how they get the best outcome, e.g. no corruption. A soft reset that is unhandled by userspace may result in persistent corruption.
Marek
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 6:27 AM Michel Dänzer <michel.daenzer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 4/24/23 18:45, Marek Olšák wrote:
> Soft resets are fatal just as hard resets, but no reset is "always fatal". There are cases when apps keep working depending on which features are being used. It's still unsafe.
Agreed, in theory.
In practice, from a user PoV, right now there's pretty much 0 chance of the user session surviving if the GPU context in certain critical processes (e.g. the Wayland compositor or Xwayland) hits a fatal reset. There's a > 0 chance of it surviving after a soft reset. There's ongoing work towards making user-space components more robust against fatal resets, but it's taking time. Meanwhile, I suspect most users would take the > 0 chance.
--
Earthling Michel Dänzer | https://redhat.com
Libre software enthusiast | Mesa and Xwayland developer
