On 17/07/2018 09:41, Chris Wilson wrote:
If the driver is wedged, we skip idling the GPU. However, we may still
have a few requests still not retired following the wedging (since they
will be waiting for a background worker trying to acquire struct_mutex).
As we hold the struct_mutex, always do a quick request retirement in
order to flush the wedged path.
Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107257
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 42d24410a98c..cc875e1dc7f6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -5074,6 +5074,8 @@ int i915_gem_suspend(struct drm_i915_private *i915)
assert_kernel_context_is_current(i915);
}
+ i915_retire_requests(i915); /* ensure we flush after wedging */
+
We cannot do this in i915_gem_set_wedged due not having the mutex?
I think it should go in an else block of the !terminally_wedged block to
signify the alternative idling method for that case. And also to make
sure the !terminally_wedged case does not start relying on this extra
retire pass.
Or alternative teach i915_gem_wait_for_idle how to handle the wedged
case and only make switching to kernel context dependant on
terminally_wedged status in i915_gem_suspend?
Simple else block sounds good enough to me. For that option:
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Regards,
Tvrtko
mutex_unlock(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
intel_uc_suspend(i915);
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
