On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:04:46AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:34:38PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > A WARN_ON is perfectly fine. > > > > The BUG in here seems to be the cause behind hard-hangs when I cat the > > i915_gem_pageflip debugfs file (which calls this from an irq > > spinlock). But only while running a full igt run after a while. I > > still need to root cause the underlying issue. > > > > I'll also start reject patches which add new BUG_ON but don't come > > with a really good justification for it. The general rule really > > should be to just WARN and hope the driver survives for long enough. > > > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Both patches merged, this one improved per Chris' suggestions on irc. > -Daniel > Hey, here's an idea. How about we root cause bugs instead of making blanket statements about the validity of real assertions? If the callers of ggtt_offset are calling it on unbound objects, it's a violation of the design. And in the other cases, it's a real bug. I'd NAK this patch if it wasn't already merged, and my NAK meant something. -- Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
