On 23/09/2019 10:35, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-09-23 10:27:01)
On 21/09/2019 10:55, Chris Wilson wrote:
Pull setting -EIO on the hung requests into its own utility function.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 32 +++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
index 1a2b71157f08..53e823d36b28 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
@@ -234,6 +234,13 @@ static void execlists_init_reg_state(u32 *reg_state,
struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
struct intel_ring *ring);
+static void mark_eio(struct i915_request *rq)
+{
+ if (!i915_request_signaled(rq))
+ dma_fence_set_error(&rq->fence, -EIO);
+ i915_request_mark_complete(rq);
+}
+
static inline u32 intel_hws_preempt_address(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
return (i915_ggtt_offset(engine->status_page.vma) +
@@ -2501,12 +2508,8 @@ static void execlists_cancel_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
__execlists_reset(engine, true);
/* Mark all executing requests as skipped. */
- list_for_each_entry(rq, &engine->active.requests, sched.link) {
- if (!i915_request_signaled(rq))
- dma_fence_set_error(&rq->fence, -EIO);
-
- i915_request_mark_complete(rq);
- }
+ list_for_each_entry(rq, &engine->active.requests, sched.link)
+ mark_eio(rq);
/* Flush the queued requests to the timeline list (for retiring). */
while ((rb = rb_first_cached(&execlists->queue))) {
@@ -2514,10 +2517,8 @@ static void execlists_cancel_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
int i;
priolist_for_each_request_consume(rq, rn, p, i) {
- list_del_init(&rq->sched.link);
list_del_init not needed any more? Should be mentioned in the commit
message.
It's not been needed for a long time; only just noticed it was still
there.
+ mark_eio(rq);
__i915_request_submit(rq);
- dma_fence_set_error(&rq->fence, -EIO);
- i915_request_mark_complete(rq);
I am also curious about Mika's question - if the change in ordering of
submit vs mark_complete is important it should be mentioned in the commit.
It's not important as the gpu is wedged, it just ties together with the
next patch where if already completed, we take a short-path through
__i915_request_submit.
Okay, after reading the next patch I see what will happen.
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
(Keep r-b after list_del respin.)
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
