From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: don't bail out of intel_wait_ring_buffer too early Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 08:37:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20111031073734.GA2920@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <1320001932-1846-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <1320001932-1846-2-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20111030182913.511d8d53@bwidawsk.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-ww0-f43.google.com (mail-ww0-f43.google.com [74.125.82.43]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9521F9E79A for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:36:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by wwf4 with SMTP id 4so938306wwf.12 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 00:36:41 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20111030182913.511d8d53@bwidawsk.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Ben Widawsky Cc: Daniel Vetter , intel-gfx List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 06:29:13PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote: > I didn't really check to see if there is actually an issue here, but > instead of 60, do you want to play nice with timeouts such as > CONFIG_DEFAULT_HUNG_TASK_TIMEOUT (ie. the min of all the timeouts and > 60)? Yeah, 60s should be half the default hung task timeout. But people who muck around with these settings should know what they're doing, so I don't care. Worst case we splatter the dmesg with hung task backtraces before we continue (and then splatter the dmesg with gpu hung warnings). -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: daniel@ffwll.ch Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48