Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2019-04-12 16:37:21)
> If the engine says it is ready for reset, it is ready
> so avoid further dancing and proceed.
>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reset.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reset.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reset.c
> index 68875ba43b8d..cde1a5309336 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reset.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_reset.c
> @@ -490,8 +490,13 @@ static int gen11_reset_engines(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
> static int gen8_engine_reset_prepare(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
> {
> struct intel_uncore *uncore = engine->uncore;
> + u32 ctl;
> int ret;
>
> + ctl = intel_uncore_read_fw(uncore, RING_RESET_CTL(engine->mmio_base));
> + if (ctl & RESET_CTL_READY_TO_RESET)
> + return 0;
> +
Would seem to not matter atm, but it does make the next patch easier.
How about pulling the i915_reg_t into this, so the second is more about
merging the CAT_ERROR handling?
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
