On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:21:48 -0800, Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote: > On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 12:55:22 +0200 > Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 08:39:26 -0800, Ben Widawsky <ben at bwidawsk.net> wrote: > > > Can you add another patch on top of this to have the starting seqno be a > > > near pre-wrap value so we can catch bugs even without igt. > > > > I tried that but failed. I suspect that there is something in hw/sw > > that doesn't like if first seqno is >0x80000000. Something in hw needs > > to initialized explicitly if seqno is not starting from 1? > > > > Nothing that I am aware of. If you have the first be 0, and then add a > huge jump right after that, does it work? We can't jump more than 0x80000000-1 as i915_seqno_passed() breaks. But with the patches for preallocate seqnos now in, I was able to get things working when first seqno was 0xFFFF0000. -Mika
