Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Wait for gen3 reset status to be asserted

[Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>]

Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:

> Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-02-08 11:43:50)
>> Any thoughts of starting to log the reset attempts
>> with timeout, even if the subsequent reset succeeds?
>
> If it succeeds, do we care? Capturing why it fails, sure.
>
> The question being what do we want to gain from it? Faster reset by
> removing timeout loops -- but if it does take X attempts, we can't
> really make it faster, just swap out one delay for another?
>
> It's a challenge, trying to provide the right information to solve a
> user's problem without their intervention and without any burden.
> Easier when you are chasing a problem down to know what you need. And
> likely need again in future?

I was thinking of gauging the rest robustness. To check if
the level we are at, through CI. I would keep the timeouts and would
keep retries. 

Mainly the intent would be to find a pattern. Like if on some platform,
after test x, the first reset always timeouts would be a sign
to further robustify.

-Mika
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx