[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53DF9C88.6060107@amd.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 16:45:28 +0200
From: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
<airlied@...ux.ie>
CC: <thellstrom@...are.com>, <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
<bskeggs@...hat.com>, <alexander.deucher@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
Am 04.08.2014 um 16:40 schrieb Maarten Lankhorst:
> op 04-08-14 16:37, Christian König schreef:
>>> It'a pain to deal with gpu reset.
>> Yeah, well that's nothing new.
>>
>>> I've now tried other solutions but that would mean reverting to the old style during gpu lockup recovery, and only running the delayed work when !lockup.
>>> But this meant that the timeout was useless to add. I think the cleanest is keeping the v2 patch, because potentially any waiting code can be called during lockup recovery.
>> The lockup code itself should never call any waiting code and V2 doesn't seem to handle a couple of cases correctly either.
>>
>> How about moving the fence waiting out of the reset code?
> What cases did I miss then?
>
> I'm curious how you want to move the fence waiting out of reset, when there are so many places that could potentially wait, like radeon_ib_get can call radeon_sa_bo_new which can do a wait, or radeon_ring_alloc that can wait on radeon_fence_wait_next, etc.
The IB test itself doesn't needs to be protected by the exclusive lock.
Only everything between radeon_save_bios_scratch_regs and
radeon_ring_restore.
Christian.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists