From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: hangcheck timeout for debugfs
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 08:46:53 -0700
Message-ID: <20110624154653.GD21246@snipes.kumite>
References: <1308869354-3145-1-git-send-email-ben@bwidawsk.net>
	<aefc95$i50h1@orsmga001.jf.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from cloud01.chad-versace.us (184-106-247-128.static.cloud-ips.com
	[184.106.247.128])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15329E878
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 24 Jun 2011 08:47:26 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <aefc95$i50h1@orsmga001.jf.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 12:48:22AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:49:14 -0700, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> > Provide a user accessible way to change the hangcheck timer. This is
> > useful mostly for disabling the timer completely (value <= 0).
> 
> Having i915.hangcheck_interval as a read/write module parameter was
> better. :-p
> -Chris

I considered this, but I wasn't sure how to manage the sysfs parameters,
and prevent users from doing stupid things. Furthermore, I think to be
correct we must delete sync the timer if the user requests an interval
of 0, and we can only do that if we have struct mutex (again the sysfs
problem).

Ben