On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:16:04PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: > On 26/07/2016 22:52, Chris Wilson wrote: > >A totally unexplained change. If it is because you think to want to break > >waiters on struct_mutex, try again. > So you don't want error->flags to include engine reset bits? > ok, it should be possible to use engine_mask itself. > > Next patch separates engine reset and full gpu reset in separate > functions, for branching purposes i915_full_gpu_reset_in_progress() > is added, is this ok or directly use test_bit() ? The bit serves 2 functions: serialise error handling, and waking up waiters on the struct_mutex. That second function is exposed through the i915_reset_in_progress(), which is being altered here without explaining how the changed semantics impacts the current users or why it is necessary. imo we can do engine resets without struct_mutex. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
