Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2019-02-11 15:13:19) > Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > We impose upon ourselves a strict timeout for resets (to ensure forward > > progress by use of a failsafe). Prefer to use the expedited > > synchronisation function in this case to reduce the likelihood of a > > spurious delay being treated as a deadlock. > > 5 seconds of spurious delay? Past experience with rcu says over 30s is not unheard of; though it does start to complain if the system skips over 120s without an rcu grace period. > Well, better to rule this one out, Ulterior motive is that we still want fast resets :) We shouldn't upset the RT crowd too much as we are only using this sparingly. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
