On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 03:22:10PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > We now clearly see that in order to get next seqno we need to add one. > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > index 3b4db55..f75d10a 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@ static int i915_gem_pageflip_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) > seq_printf(m, "Flip queued on %s at seqno %x, next seqno %x [current breadcrumb %x], completed? %d\n", > engine->name, > work->flip_queued_req->global_seqno, > - atomic_read(&dev_priv->gt.global_timeline.seqno), > + 1 + atomic_read(&dev_priv->gt.global_timeline.seqno), I was thinking that req->engine->last_submitted_seqno would be more useful to report (in terms of deciding what is causing the stall). -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
