Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757108AbaGWHhU (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 03:37:20 -0400 Received: from mail-bl2lp0208.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.163.208]:29116 "EHLO na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756512AbaGWHhS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 03:37:18 -0400 X-WSS-ID: 0N95MHY-08-X9W-02 X-M-MSG: Message-ID: <53CF6622.6060803@amd.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:37:06 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2hyaXN0aWFuIEvDtm5pZw==?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Vetter , =?UTF-8?B?Q2hyaXN0aWFuIEvDtm5p?= =?UTF-8?B?Zw==?= CC: Maarten Lankhorst , Thomas Hellstrom , nouveau , LKML , dri-devel , Ben Skeggs , "Deucher, Alexander" Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 09/17] drm/radeon: use common fence implementation for fences References: <20140709093124.11354.3774.stgit@patser> <20140709122953.11354.46381.stgit@patser> <53CE2421.5040906@amd.com> <20140722114607.GL15237@phenom.ffwll.local> <20140722115737.GN15237@phenom.ffwll.local> <53CE56ED.4040109@vodafone.de> <20140722132652.GO15237@phenom.ffwll.local> <53CE6AFA.1060807@vodafone.de> <53CE84AA.9030703@amd.com> <53CE8A57.2000803@vodafone.de> <53CF58FB.8070609@canonical.com> <53CF5B9F.1050800@amd.com> <53CF5EFE.6070307@canonical.com> <53CF63C2.7070407@vodafone.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed X-Originating-IP: [10.224.155.198] Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-EOPAttributedMessage: 0 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:165.204.84.222;CTRY:US;IPV:NLI;IPV:NLI;EFV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;SFS:(6009001)(428002)(189002)(199002)(377454003)(24454002)(92726001)(83322001)(83072002)(19580405001)(68736004)(44976005)(93886003)(99396002)(4396001)(85852003)(76176999)(87936001)(85182001)(87266999)(46102001)(19580395003)(33656002)(97736001)(85306003)(101416001)(23676002)(50986999)(102836001)(21056001)(83506001)(76482001)(20776003)(65806001)(95666004)(36756003)(64126003)(81342001)(79102001)(81542001)(107046002)(106466001)(85202003)(64706001)(86362001)(80316001)(54356999)(65816999)(77982001)(47776003)(59896001)(74662001)(65956001)(50466002)(105586002)(84676001)(80022001);DIR:OUT;SFP:;SCL:1;SRVR:BLUPR02MB036;H:atltwp02.amd.com;FPR:;MLV:sfv;PTR:InfoDomainNonexistent;MX:1;LANG:en; X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID: X-Forefront-PRVS: 028166BF91 Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is 165.204.84.222) smtp.mailfrom=Christian.Koenig@amd.com; X-OriginatorOrg: amd4.onmicrosoft.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am 23.07.2014 09:31, schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Christian König > wrote: >> It's not a locking problem I'm talking about here. Radeons lockup handling >> kicks in when anything calls into the driver from the outside, if you have a >> fence wait function that's called from the outside but doesn't handle >> lockups you essentially rely on somebody else calling another radeon >> function for the lockup to be resolved. > So you don't have a timer in radeon that periodically checks whether > progress is still being made? That's the approach we're using in i915, > together with some tricks to kick any stuck waiters so that we can > reliably step in and grab locks for the reset. We tried this approach, but it didn't worked at all. I already considered trying it again because of the upcoming fence implementation, but reconsidering that when a driver is forced to change it's handling because of the fence implementation that's just another hint that there is something wrong here. Christian. > -Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/