On Sun, Apr 06, 2014 at 11:35:03AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > On Sat, Apr 05, 2014 at 07:45:28PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > The issue I was seeing appeared to seeing from sigkill. In such a case, > > the process may want to die before the context/work/address space is > > freeable. For example: > > 1. evict_vm called for whatever reason > > 2. wait_seqno because the VMA is still active > > hmm something isn't right here. Why did I get to wait_seqno if pin_count > was 0? Just FYI, this wasn't hypothetical. I did trace it all the way to > exactly ERESTARTSYS from wait_seqno. > > By the way, another option in evict would be: > while(ret = (i915_vma_unbind(vma) == -ERESTARTSYS)); > WARN_ON(ret); > > > 3. receive signal break out of wait_seqno > > 4. return to evict_vm and the above WARN > > > > Our error handling from there just spirals. > > > > One issue I have with our current code is I'd really like eviction to > > not be able to fail (obviously extreme cases are unavoidable). This is unrealistic since we must support X which uses sigtimer. > > Perhaps > > one other solution would be to make sure the context is idled before > > evicting its VM. Indeed. Anyway, I do concur that wrapping i915_driver_preclose() with dev_priv->mm.interruptible = false; would make us both happy. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
