On 19/12/16 00:27, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 16/12/2016 20:20, Michel Thierry wrote:From: Arun Siluvery <arun.siluvery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> @@ -937,6 +937,7 @@ struct drm_i915_error_state { enum intel_engine_hangcheck_action hangcheck_action; struct i915_address_space *vm; int num_requests; + u32 reset_count; /* position of active request inside the ring */ u32 rq_head, rq_post, rq_tail; @@ -1629,6 +1630,8 @@ struct i915_gpu_error { #define I915_RESET_IN_PROGRESS 0 #define I915_WEDGED (BITS_PER_LONG - 1) + unsigned long engine_reset_count[I915_NUM_ENGINES]; + /** * Waitqueue to signal when a hang is detected. Used to for waiters * to release the struct_mutex for the reset to procede. @@ -3397,6 +3400,12 @@ static inline u32 i915_reset_count(struct i915_gpu_error *error) return READ_ONCE(error->reset_count); } +static inline u32 i915_engine_reset_count(struct i915_gpu_error *error, + struct intel_engine_cs *engine) +{ + return READ_ONCE(error->engine_reset_count[engine->id]); +}Accidentally spotted a type width mismatch here between u32 and unsigned long. Not sure which one would be best, maybe unsigned int? Regards,
Thanks, I'll change engine_reset_count to u32... I don't think we should worry too much if it overflows.
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
