On Fri, 2016-11-04 at 21:01 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 10:33:24PM +0200, Imre Deak wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-11-03 at 21:14 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Where is that guaranteed? I thought we only serialised with the > > > pm > > > interrupts. Remember this happens before rpm suspend, since > > > gem_idle_work_handler is responsible for dropping the GPU > > > wakelock. > > > > I meant that the 100msec after the last request signals completion > > and > > this handler is scheduled is normally enough for the context > > complete > > interrupt to get delivered. But yea, it's not a guarantee. > > If only it was that deterministic! The idle_worker was scheduled > 100ms > after some retire_worker, just not necessarily the most recent. So it > could be running exactly as active_requests -> 0 and so before the > context-interrupt.
Right, but we don't poll in that case, so there is no overhead. > Anyway, it was a good find! > -Chris > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
