Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-03-27 10:22:11) > Chris Wilson <[email protected]> writes: > > > When cancelling the requests and clearing out the ports following a > > successful preemption completion, also clear the active flag. I had > > assumed that all preemptions would be followed by an immediate dequeue > > (preserving the active user flag), but under rare circumstances we may > > be triggering a preemption for the second port only for it to have > > completed before the preemotion kicks in; leaving execlists->active set > > even though the system is now idle. > > > > We can clear the flag inside the common execlists_cancel_port_requests() > > as the other users also expect the semantics of active being cleared. > > > > Fixes: f6322eddaff7 ("drm/i915/preemption: Allow preemption between > > submission ports") > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > > Cc: Michał Winiarski <[email protected]> > > Cc: Michel Thierry <[email protected]> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]>
Applied to have one less random failure around preemption. Unlikely CI will hit as we simply don't apply enough stress. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
