Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 10:38:19AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 09:17:14AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 05:03:14PM +0200, Mika Kuoppala wrote: >> > > @@ -2616,6 +2612,9 @@ void i915_handle_error(struct drm_device *dev, bool wedged, >> > > va_list args; >> > > char error_msg[80]; >> > > >> > > + if (WARN_ON(mutex_is_locked(&dev_priv->dev->struct_mutex))) >> > > + return; >> > > + >> > >> > Oops, sorry, I should have realised this was wrong earlier. The mutex >> > breaking occurs later in i915_handle_error. >> >> Oh well, already merged. Also, prts seems to complain that a bunch of >> hang stress-tests changed from fail to timeout because of this one here. >> Is this patch accidentally fix a bug and we just need to tune the tests, >> or is there some new deadlock now? prts results are really thin, per usual >> :( > > Yes. It will also prevent the gpu reset which those tests depend upon. Jani pointed me on the dups. There will be more I think. The test should have been more deep into the reset handling and instead of bailing out we should have requeued ourselves to the least. Sorry. -Mika > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
