From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: "Das, Nirmoy" <nirmoy.das@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, chris.p.wilson@intel.com,
Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/xehpsdv/selftests: Flush all tiles on test exit
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 13:55:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y9EmtfAblOP3HCrP@ashyti-mobl2.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9553f978-b2f4-8cac-e456-f9e31f1fcd74@linux.intel.com>
Hi Nirmoy,
> > > + struct intel_gt *gt;
> > > + unsigned int i;
> > > + int ret = 0;
> > > - cond_resched();
> > > + for_each_gt(gt, i915, i) {
> > > + if (intel_gt_is_wedged(gt))
> > > + ret = -EIO;
> > I'm just wondering if it makes sense to check if the gt is
> > wedged.
>
> Could you please expand more, what are your thoughts about this ?
if we are wedged, I do expect the wait_for_idle to fail and not
having any pending job.
But nevertheless it's not that important, it's just the way this
function is organized that makes me raise an eyebrow.
My r-b stands, still.
Andi
[...]
> > > + cond_resched();
> > > - GEM_TRACE("%pS timed out.\n",
> > > - __builtin_return_address(0));
> > > - GEM_TRACE_DUMP();
> > > + if (intel_gt_wait_for_idle(gt, HZ * 3) == -ETIME) {
> > > + pr_err("%pS timed out, cancelling all further testing.\n",
> > > + __builtin_return_address(0));
> > > - intel_gt_set_wedged(gt);
> > > - ret = -EIO;
> > > + GEM_TRACE("%pS timed out.\n",
> > > + __builtin_return_address(0));
> > > + GEM_TRACE_DUMP();
> > > +
> > > + intel_gt_set_wedged(gt);
> > > + ret = -EIO;
> > > + }
> > > }
> > > return ret;
> > > --
> > > 2.39.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-25 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-24 14:22 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/xehpsdv/selftests: Flush all tiles on test exit Nirmoy Das
2023-01-24 16:10 ` Andi Shyti
2023-01-24 17:05 ` Das, Nirmoy
2023-01-25 12:55 ` Andi Shyti [this message]
2023-01-24 17:01 ` Matt Roper
2023-01-24 17:03 ` Das, Nirmoy
2023-01-24 22:05 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2023-01-25 1:40 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Y9EmtfAblOP3HCrP@ashyti-mobl2.lan \
--to=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris.p.wilson@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=nirmoy.das@intel.com \
--cc=nirmoy.das@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox