From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: fixup hangman rebase goof-up Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:10:31 +0100 Message-ID: <1339859448_30750@CP5-2952> References: <1339857725-9716-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <1339858660_30709@CP5-2952> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fireflyinternet.com (smtp.fireflyinternet.com [109.228.6.236]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D2E9E803 for ; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 08:10:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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: Daniel Vetter Cc: Intel Graphics Development List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 17:04:27 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2012 16:42:05 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> I've added a bit of logic such that running the hangman test on chips > >> without any hw reset support at all doesn't wedge the gpu because the > >> reset failed. This relied on checking for non-null stop_rings. > >> Unfortunately I've botched a rebase somewhere and stop_rings is still > >> cleared at the old place before the reset code. > >> > >> Fix this up so that running the i-g-t tests on gen2/3 doesn't result > >> in a wedged gpu. > > > > dev_priv->stop_rings = 0; is there on both dif and dinq. An unpushed > > mistake perhaps? > > Well, the hangman got merged for 3.5 and has been broken since then. > Yeah, shame on me for not noticing earlier :( > > This came about that stop_rings = 0 as removed by this patch was the > earlier place if reset it. But to not wedge the gpu I need to still > know whether this is a simulated gpu hang after the reset code ran and > failed with -ENODEV (indicating the missing reset code). The right > code is in intel_gpu_reset. I've tested before submitting the patches, > but somehow managed to slip in the old hunk somehow in a last-minute > rebase. > > This patch just kills this spurious hunk. ...but this patches adds the existing line... * confused. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre