On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:45:00AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:20:20AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > + if (ring->hangcheck.seqno == seqno) { > > + if (ring_idle(ring, seqno)) { > > + if (waitqueue_active(&ring->irq_queue)) { > > + /* Issue a wake-up to catch stuck h/w. > > */ > > + DRM_ERROR("Hangcheck timer elapsed... > > %s idle\n", > > + ring->name); > > + wake_up_all(&ring->irq_queue); > > + ring->hangcheck.score += HUNG; > > Not sure whether we want to hit missed interrupts this badly, it was > rather common a while back ;-) But we can fine-tune this easily now, so > now reservations for merging from my side.
Not sure what you mean here. The check is fairly easy and has gotten us out of many a hole before, and makes for a good defense. So how would you want to fine tune it? -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx