Quoting Daniel Vetter (2018-02-20 15:44:38) > On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 02:33:08PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > PSR may not exit instantaneously, so while asserting that PSR is > > disabled after an action, we may have to wait a short while. Currently > > that wait is waiting for PSR to enabled and expecting to timeout; this > > fails when we start the assertion with PSR already enabled. Fix the wait > > to wait until PSR is disabled rather than timeout. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I guess that's the reply to my question about the earlier > kms_frontbuffer_tracking patch? Which, the -ENODEV? I thought I explained that was purely to cope with the i915_fbc_info API for !HAS_FBC machines, as we are running kms_frontbuffer_tracking across farm1 in idle time. https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/kasan2.html > Makes a bunch more sense to me. There's the question of whether to apply this to fbc_wait_until_disabled() as well, but I guess fbc behaves slightly differently as we don't see the assert failure there. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
