Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 02 Sep 2015, Arun Siluvery <arun.siluvery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 20/08/2015 16:27, Chris Wilson wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:34:59PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote: >>>> If we leave the last_retired_head to pre-reset value, we might >>>> end up in a situation where intel_ring_space() returns wrong >>>> value on next hardware init. >>> >>> http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/46612/ >>> and earlier >>> -Chris >>> >> Hi Chris, >> >> I see the warning even with below batch, >> >> [PATCH 50/70] drm/i915: The argument for postfix is redundant >> http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/46601/ >> >> the following patch need to be updated as it uses olr, >> [PATCH 51/70] drm/i915: Record the position of the start of >> the request >> http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/46612/ >> >> Do we need some of the previous patches in series as well? >> >> This patch is fixing the issue in the current code, do you think we can >> get this in its current state? > > Is this patch still valid? > My understanding is that Chris wants more throughout revamp of the code so that we have a common ringbuffer init. And then go further and remove the special reset handling in execlist case. But argument for this patch is that it fixes a bug in current nightly and it makes the legacy ring init and execlist ring init identical how they set/reset the ring space. Until we gain the generic ringbuffer init code. Chris? -Mika > BR, > Jani. > > > -- > Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
