RE: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Increase KIQ invalidate_tlbs timeout

2025-04-04 Thread Russell, Kent
; Sent: Friday, March 21, 2025 2:27 PM > To: amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Cornwall, Jay ; Russell, Kent > > Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Increase KIQ invalidate_tlbs timeout > > KIQ invalidate_tlbs request has been seen to marginally exceed the > configured 100 ms tim

Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Increase KIQ invalidate_tlbs timeout

2025-03-22 Thread Jay Cornwall
On 3/21/2025 14:36, Russell, Kent wrote: Do we want to actually do a fence_wait_polling before the loop begins like in all of the other functions? I know 5ms isn't a big deal, but the other ones we have are all after a single fence_wait_polling first. Oh I see what you're saying now. This in

Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Increase KIQ invalidate_tlbs timeout

2025-03-21 Thread Jay Cornwall
On 3/21/2025 14:36, Russell, Kent wrote: Do we want to actually do a fence_wait_polling before the loop begins like in all of the other functions? I know 5ms isn't a big deal, but the other ones we have are all after a single fence_wait_polling first. I think the intent of that is to exit ea

[PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Increase KIQ invalidate_tlbs timeout

2025-03-21 Thread Jay Cornwall
KIQ invalidate_tlbs request has been seen to marginally exceed the configured 100 ms timeout on systems under load. All other KIQ requests in the driver use a 10 second timeout. Use a similar timeout implementation on the invalidate_tlbs path. Signed-off-by: Jay Cornwall Cc: Kent Russell --- d