Re: [PATCH 09/31] drm/i915: Update a couple of hangcheck comments to talk about engines

[Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>]

On ma, 2016-07-25 at 08:44 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> We still have lots of comments that refer to the old ring when we mean
> struct intel_engine_cs and its hardware correspondence. This patch fixes
> an instance inside hangcheck to talk about engines.
> 

These could be squashed down a bit too. 

Reviewed-by: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>

> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> index 7104dc1463eb..f5bf4f913a91 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
> @@ -3140,13 +3140,13 @@ static void i915_hangcheck_elapsed(struct work_struct *work)
>  				}
>  			} else {
>  				/* We always increment the hangcheck score
> -				 * if the ring is busy and still processing
> +				 * if the engine is busy and still processing
>  				 * the same request, so that no single request
>  				 * can run indefinitely (such as a chain of
>  				 * batches). The only time we do not increment
>  				 * the hangcheck score on this ring, if this
> -				 * ring is in a legitimate wait for another
> -				 * ring. In that case the waiting ring is a
> +				 * engine is in a legitimate wait for another
> +				 * engine. In that case the waiting engine is a
>  				 * victim and we want to be sure we catch the
>  				 * right culprit. Then every time we do kick
>  				 * the ring, add a small increment to the
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx