On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 02:24:39PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 12:10:46PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > My testing only looks at the GT side, and we do stress that pretty hard > > because of execlists and have reasonable methods of detection if we stop > > processing execbuf. I'm more worried about the display and pipe interrupts. > > IIRC GT was where the problem was originally. Before execlists, the only source of GT interrupts would be user-interrupts. There the problem is usually not so much that we miss the GT interrupt, but that the seqno write is not completed by the time the interrupt is asserted. I hope that was the problem you saw. Anyway, confidence improved if it was GT as the source of worries. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
