Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-12-19 21:02:15) > Quoting Rodrigo Vivi (2017-12-19 20:49:54) > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 01:14:19PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Useful for verifying our bookkeeper when we encounter is knowing whether > > > we think the engine is idle at the time of the GPU hang. > > > > > > References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104305 > > > > Here you mention the hang as "false positive"... > > if it is a false positive and we have this idle information > > shouldn't we handle this differently instead of trowing the error > > information and reseting the GPU? > > I have contemplated skipping the reset if we think the GPU is idle, but > that does rather assume that we have perfect knowledge and that skipping > the reset is a good thing. (Though we do differentiate between resets to > restore hw state and resets to fix a GPU hang already, so maybe it's not > so bad, the caveat being an explicit request to reset the GPU.) In this > case, a cursory glance said the engine should be idle (RING_MODE has the > idle bit, RING_HEAD == RING_TAIL and the last seqno was completed) and I > wanted to confirm that the driver also thought the engine should have > been idle. That would leave the question as to why hangcheck thought > differently, i.e. I'm trying to narrow the cause to a particular piece of > code. Thanks for the review, pushed and time to chase up the reporter to see if he can reproduce on drm-tip. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
