Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "radeon_sa_bo_new".
2014 Aug 04
2
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...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.
2014 Aug 04
2
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...;
>>>> 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.
> I'm not sure about that, what do you w...
2014 Aug 04
2
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...bout 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.
>>> I'm not sure about tha...
2014 Aug 04
2
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
> 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
2014 Aug 04
0
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...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.
2014 Aug 04
0
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...her.
>>>
>>> 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.
I'm not sure about that, what do you want...
2014 Aug 04
0
[PATCH 09/19] drm/radeon: handle lockup in delayed work, v2
...t;> 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.
>> I'm not sure about that, what...