Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-04-13 18:20:02) > > > On 13/04/18 08:59, Chris Wilson wrote: > > die. What we expect to happen is spin[0] is (more or less, there is still > > dmesg) silently killed by the preempt timeout. If that timeout doesn't > > The silent part is interesting, how do we make sure that during normal > preemption operations (e.g. preempt on an ARB_CHECK) we didn't silently > discard the preempted batch? Do we care? Not particularly. From our point of view, the goal is that the high priority spin[2] runs, no matter what. If the other requests cooperate, that works out best for them. The challenge for the test itself is detecting when the timeout was hit. We aren't particularly good at demonstrating the spinner doesn't block preemption, it is demonstrated in other tests, but we don't assert that it is so. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
