On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 09:42:07 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-08-14 00:39, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 22:41:11 -0700, Ben Widawsky
> > wrote:
> >> The previous state is bogus when we've gone into idle. Actually
> >> there
> >> would be a known state of idle (ie. all units a
On 2012-08-14 00:39, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 22:41:11 -0700, Ben Widawsky
wrote:
The previous state is bogus when we've gone into idle. Actually
there
would be a known state of idle (ie. all units are done), but since
it
differs for every platform, we can just set 0, and let t
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 22:41:11 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> The previous state is bogus when we've gone into idle. Actually there
> would be a known state of idle (ie. all units are done), but since it
> differs for every platform, we can just set 0, and let the hangcheck
> progress as normal.
>
>
The previous state is bogus when we've gone into idle. Actually there
would be a known state of idle (ie. all units are done), but since it
differs for every platform, we can just set 0, and let the hangcheck
progress as normal.
References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=52429
Tested
