On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Quoting Daniel Vetter (2017-07-19 13:54:58) >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> index 5aa7ca1ab592..4762f158032d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_display.c >> @@ -3471,10 +3471,9 @@ void intel_prepare_reset(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv) >> !gpu_reset_clobbers_display(dev_priv)) >> return; >> >> - /* We have a modeset vs reset deadlock, defensively unbreak it. >> - * >> - * FIXME: We can do a _lot_ better, this is just a first iteration.*/ >> - i915_gem_set_wedged(dev_priv); >> + /* We have a modeset vs reset deadlock, defensively unbreak it. */ >> + set_bit(I915_RESET_MODESET, &dev_priv->gpu_error.flags); >> + wake_up_all(&dev_priv->gpu_error.wait_queue); > > How are we breaking the > > modeset_lock -> struct_mutex -> wait_on_reset ? > > We wait the modeset_lock next which stops the reset from > proceeding, and so the deadlock persists until the wedge-me timeout? Hm indeed, I didn't check my logs carefully enough and there's still "i915_reset_device timed out" in it. But I also thought the only real wait we have left for the gpu is the one under i915_sw_fence. I think we could simply switch i915_mutex_lock_interruptible calls in atomic modeset over mutex_lock_interruptible? Or is there another can of worms I'm missing? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
