From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F1C0C25B7C for ; Mon, 27 May 2024 10:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 740DF10E0E5; Mon, 27 May 2024 10:48:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="GX/R7fyx"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.19]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3344110E0FD; Mon, 27 May 2024 10:48:00 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1716806880; x=1748342880; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=iNFQ7o+1ofjztuvjdIzNE+iV2ceTEh/py0eSks+HeNE=; b=GX/R7fyxk44p6s15N/yJ8zgF9CSZ5oKWiumG6ZyecSlGWX+mDnVVqDbr kmyebtUsGqXtDu+lkV7CuWo+VXmIbK+D6jLqlR5ja/irGYeDLaSbIE2V7 Byc3Vn6mMIRjpEJ84O86euF9RwrX9s2VvH6KZNbxsRjwYCj7RrWSGjpGL KqEkJl9SiMZjG2lJcfLZXyGeRv6sQhZXP3wUZ39UMtHWp9ixN9piGZZUv M47L/fS54fqOWXVPGyq5lgf0QS15pewCeqB4lBbpvcmagNhI9wkSVOFHx 9DdeTrYRSwxskn6Ik3zMtgQOENBNUqj1Zr3Hh+jvlbx6Q/L41LwxGZbAC g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: PcFD7nq/RjS3una0lXdtuA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: oowZZ9C1RR+xPqdXLkGWDw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11084"; a="12967237" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,192,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="12967237" Received: from fmviesa009.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.149]) by orvoesa111.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2024 03:48:00 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Iv/5M7qDQBWsLo9dj8BAtA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: MG0CKHZnT+qLC06qeiHCJA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,192,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="34805621" Received: from dneilan-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO intel.com) ([10.245.244.157]) by fmviesa009-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 May 2024 03:47:58 -0700 Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 11:47:49 +0100 From: Andi Shyti To: Rodrigo Vivi Cc: Andi Shyti , intel-gfx , dri-devel , Nirmoy Das , Janusz Krzysztofik , Andi Shyti Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Increase FLR timeout from 3s to 9s Message-ID: References: <20240523235853.171796-1-andi.shyti@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 10:07:44AM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 01:58:53AM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote: > > Following the guidelines it takes 3 seconds to perform an FLR > > reset. Let's give it a bit more slack because this time can > > change depending on the platform and on the firmware > > But did we see any issue with that? yes, we have some FLR expiration timeouts that apparently are not able to bring up the device and the memory is not accessible anymore. It's worth giving it a bit more time. > if that changes per platform and per firmware, shouldn't it all > be explicit in the spec as well? Is it always documented? We might anyway die after the FLR reset failure, so that I see it quite safe to wait and pray a little more. Andi