Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757145AbaGWIB7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 04:01:59 -0400 Received: from mail-ig0-f171.google.com ([209.85.213.171]:45043 "EHLO mail-ig0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756744AbaGWIB5 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 04:01:57 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [84.73.67.144] In-Reply-To: <53CF6622.6060803@amd.com> 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> <53CF6622.6060803@amd.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 10:01:56 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH 09/17] drm/radeon: use common fence implementation for fences From: Daniel Vetter To: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= , Maarten Lankhorst , Thomas Hellstrom , nouveau , LKML , dri-devel , Ben Skeggs , "Deucher, Alexander" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Christian König wrote: > 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. Out of curiosity: What's the blocker for using a timer/scheduled work to reset radeon? Getting this right on i915 has been fairly tricky and we now have an elaborate multi-stage state machine to get the driver through a reset. So always interested in different solutions. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- 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/