From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Do hw quiescing first during
	unload
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:36:30 +0300
Message-ID: <20131018073630.GK13047@intel.com>
References: <1382011373-22172-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<20131017190726.GB16575@bwidawsk.net>
	<20131017193744.GB4148@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
	<20131017210434.GC16575@bwidawsk.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E67E5FFD
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 18 Oct 2013 00:36:33 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131017210434.GC16575@bwidawsk.net>
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: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 02:04:34PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 08:37:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:07:26PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 01:02:53PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > > If we force the hw to idle as our first step during unload, we can =
abort
> > > > the unload upon failure. Later we can probe whether the hardware re=
main
> > > > active even after we try to shut it down.
> > > > =

> > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > =

> > > Isn't it pretty mean to fail to unload? Wouldn't pci_clear_master yie=
ld
> > > what we want?
> > =

> > It may be mean, but it seems to me to be the right thing to do if we
> > cannot turn off the hardware to unload the driver...
> > -Chris
> > =

> > -- =

> > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> =

> And what about my suggestion of simply using pci_clear_master?

Might that hang some boxes?

-- =

Ville Syrj=E4l=E4
Intel OTC