On 20/05/16 13:23, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 01:07:29PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 19/05/16 14:13, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 01:50:51PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 19/05/16 12:32, Chris Wilson wrote:
The queue only ever contains at most one item and has no special flags.
It is just a very simple wrapper around the system-wq - a complication
with no benefits.
How much time do we take in the reset case - is it acceptable to do
that work from the system wq?
Hangcheck is a handful of register reads and some pointer chasing per
engine. (There is a seqno_barrier in there which may be reasonably
expensive but not a cpu hog). The error capture is run from the
hangcheck context - and that is no small task (especially if we ever
apply the object compression patches), but for safety we need to call
stop_machine() so it really doesn't matter at that point.
I don't see a stop_machine? So until there is one, using the system
wq is a bit impolite in the error capture state, agreed?
It's in the queue to fix the odd oops we get during capture.
You'd be happy with system_long_wq in the meantime?
Having read the comment in include/linux/workqueue.h I think that would
be more appropriate in general, so yes.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
