On 7/23/2020 6:07 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
Gracefully skip over the failures in the frequency scaling for the
moment, the results are under review.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Sundaresan, Sujaritha" <sujaritha.sundaresan@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Ewins, Jon" <jon.ewins@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
index 8624f5d2a1f3..b50ed20c427c 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c
@@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ int live_rps_frequency_cs(void *arg)
f = act; /* may skip ahead [pcu granularity] */
}
- err = -EINVAL;
+ err = -EINTR;
}
err_vma:
@@ -841,7 +841,7 @@ int live_rps_frequency_srm(void *arg)
f = act; /* may skip ahead [pcu granularity] */
}
- err = -EINVAL;
+ err = -EINTR;
}
err_vma:
The BAT failure looks to be unrelated.
Hopefully we can get a little more clarity in the future as to why the
CS does not scale once we are sure that there are no HW or PCU issues.
Reviewed-by : Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@xxxxxxxxx>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
