Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-10-11 15:22:17) > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-10-11 14:55:00) > > > > On 10/10/2019 08:14, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > + if (engine) > > > + active |= engine->mask; > > > + > > > + dma_fence_put(fence); > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Send a "high priority pulse" down the engine to cause the > > > + * current request to be momentarily preempted. (If it fails to > > > + * be preempted, it will be reset). As we have marked our context > > > + * as banned, any incomplete request, including any running, will > > > + * be skipped following the preemption. > > > + */ > > > + reset = 0; > > > + for_each_engine_masked(engine, gt->i915, active, tmp) > > > + if (intel_engine_pulse(engine)) > > > + reset |= engine->mask; > > > > What if we were able to send a pulse, but the hog cannot be preempted > > and hangcheck is obviously disabled - who will do the reset? > > Hmm, the idea is that forced-preemption causes the reset. > (See igt/gem_ctx_persistence/hostile) > > However, if we give the sysadmin the means to disable force-preemption, > we just gave them another shovel to dig a hole with. > > A last resort would be another timer here to ensure the context was > terminated. That does not cut it, as we only looking at it from the pov of the context being guilty and not the victim. So the answer remains forced preemption, and a backdoor if that is disabled. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
