Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2019-05-08 13:18:06)
> Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> 
> > If the HW fail to ack a change in forcewake status, the machine is as
> > good as dead -- it may recover, but in reality it missed the mmio
> > updates and is now in a very inconsistent state. If it happens, we can't
> > trust the CI results (or at least the fails may be genuine but due to
> > the HW being dead and not the actual test!) so reboot the machine (CI
> > checks for a kernel taint in between each test and reboots if the
> > machine is tainted).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuopp...@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Sounds and looks reasonable. Should we also taint if we have
> unclaimed mmio after init sequence?

The unclaimed mmio throws a WARN so it naturally gets the
add_taint(TAINT_WARN) and CI reboots already. Otherwise, yes :)
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to