Am 23.07.2014 12:52, schrieb Daniel Vetter:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Christian König
<christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:
And the dma-buf would still have fences belonging to both drivers, and it
would still call from outside the driver.
Calling from outside the driver is fine as long as the driver can do
everything necessary to complete it's work and isn't forced into any ugly
hacks and things that are not 100% reliable.
So I don't see much other approach as integrating recovery code for not
firing interrupts and some kind of lockup handling into the fence code as
well.
That approach doesn't really work at that well since every driver has
it's own reset semantics. And we're trying to move away from global
reset to fine-grained reset. So stop-the-world reset is out of
fashion, at least for i915. As you said, reset is normal in gpus and
we're trying to make reset less invasive. I really don't see a point
in imposing a reset scheme upon all drivers and I think you have about
as much motivation to convert radeon to the scheme used by i915 as
I'll have for converting to the one used by radeon. If it would fit at
all.
Oh my! No, I didn't wanted to suggest any global reset infrastructure.
My idea was more that the fence framework provides a
fence->process_signaling callback that is periodically called after
enable_signaling is called to trigger manual signal processing in the
driver.
This would both be suitable as a fallback in case of not working
interrupts as well as a chance for any driver to do necessary lockup
handling.
Christian.
I guess for radeon we just have to add tons of insulation by punting
all callbacks to work items so that radeon can do whatever it wants.
Plus start a delayed_work based fallback when ->enable_signalling is
called to make sure we work on platforms that lack interrupts.
-Daniel
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
