Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use fence_write() from rpm resume

2016-10-10 Thread Chris Wilson
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 04:13:26PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 02:07:16PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 03:41:04PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:31:50PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > > During rpm resume we restore

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use fence_write() from rpm resume

2016-10-10 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 02:07:16PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 03:41:04PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:31:50PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > During rpm resume we restore the fences, but we do not have the > > > protection of struct_mutex. Th

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use fence_write() from rpm resume

2016-10-10 Thread Chris Wilson
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 03:41:04PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:31:50PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > During rpm resume we restore the fences, but we do not have the > > protection of struct_mutex. This rules out updating the activity > > tracking on the fences, and req

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use fence_write() from rpm resume

2016-10-10 Thread Ville Syrjälä
On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:31:50PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > During rpm resume we restore the fences, but we do not have the > protection of struct_mutex. This rules out updating the activity > tracking on the fences, and requires us to rely on the rpm as the > serialisation barrier instead. >

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Use fence_write() from rpm resume

2016-10-07 Thread Chris Wilson
During rpm resume we restore the fences, but we do not have the protection of struct_mutex. This rules out updating the activity tracking on the fences, and requires us to rely on the rpm as the serialisation barrier instead. [ 350.298052] [drm:intel_runtime_resume [i915]] Resuming device [ 350.