On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 04:42:32PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Jeff McGee (2018-03-21 15:55:16) > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 03:00:23PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > After resetting the GPU (or subset of engines), call synchronize_irq() > > > to flush any pending irq before proceeding with the cleanup. For a > > > device level reset, we disable the interupts around the reset, but when > > > resetting just one engine, we have to avoid such global disabling. This > > > leaves us open to an interrupt arriving for the engine as we try to > > > reset it. We already do try to flush the IIR following the reset, but we > > > have to ensure that the in-flight interrupt does not land after we start > > > cleaning up after the reset; enter synchronize_irq(). > > > > > > As it current stands, we very rarely, but fatally, see sequences such as: > > > > > > 2.... 57964564us : execlists_reset_prepare: rcs0 > > > 2.... 57964613us : execlists_reset: rcs0 seqno=424 > > > 0d.h1 57964615us : gen8_cs_irq_handler: rcs0 CS active=1 > > > 2d..1 57964617us : __i915_request_unsubmit: rcs0 fence 29:1056 <- global_seqno 1060 > > > 2.... 57964703us : execlists_reset_finish: rcs0 > > > 0..s. 57964705us : execlists_submission_tasklet: rcs0 awake?=1, active=0, irq-posted?=1 > > > > > I can repro this sequence easily with force preemption IGT. > > With the sequence I suggested? > -Chris Yes. Your approach to protecting port[1] context is working well. This is the only issue I'm still hitting. I'll post my updated RFC set in a sec. -Jeff _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
