On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 03:12:57PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:37:55AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:02:27AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 08:02:49PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > Wean drv_hangman off the atrocious stop_rings and use a real GPU hang > > > > instead. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Doesn't this kill pre-gen6? Or at least anything where we don't have > > > proper hang recovery ... Lack of that is why I've done the original > > > stop_rings fun. > > > > Originally, igt_hang_ring required gen >= 5, but since that Ville has > > been working hard on getting reset support working for gen3 and gen4, > > now we query the kernel as to whether it can reset the device. So by > > switching over we lose testing of simulated hangs and recovery code (or > > KMS handling during wedged) for gen2. > > > > It is a loss in test coverage, but the benefit is that we can remove the > > hang injection code from the kernel. And that is a tradeoff I am willing > > to make. > > One day I will get around to trying D3 as a reset mechanism for gen2 ;) > Until then, losing the gen2 test coverage seems fairly reasonable. > I suppose the only thing it's really testing on gen2 is making sure we > don't lock up or oops when the gpu hangs. > > So what might be nice is a way to force the hang tests to run even > when gpu reset isn't supported, just to make sure the system doesn't > die completely. Obviously it's going to be slow to run such tests due > to needing a reboot between every test, but it would be enough to do > an occasional spot check to see if there's been a regression. Would "export IGT_HANG_WITHOUT_RESET=1" be enough? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
