> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:23:15AM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > As the execbuffer dispatch grows ever more complex and involves > > multiple stages of moving objects into the aperture, we need to take > > greater care that we do not evict our execbuffer objects prior to > > dispatch. This is relatively simple as we can just keep the objects > > pinned for not just the relocation but until we are finished. > > One such example is the possibility of the context switch causing an eviction > or hitting the shrinker in order to fit its object into the aperture. > > Link: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2013- > November/036166.html > Reported-by: "Siluvery, Arun" <arun.siluv...@intel.com> >
After a backport to the 3.10 tree and running the soak test for 25 hours: Tested-by: Rafael Barbalho <rafael.barba...@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Cc: Ben Widawsky <benjamin.widaw...@intel.com> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <dan...@ffwll.ch> > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
