On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:13:06AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:15:19AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > Besides that, no real performance gain was found on our tests with different
> > and even multiple workloads.
That either means you didn't try hard enough, or that the
On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 11:15:19AM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> This reverts commit 521e62e49a42661a4ee0102644517dbe2f100a23.
>
> Although POST_SYNC brought a bit of stability to Semaphores on BDW
> it didn't solved all issues and some hungs can still occour when
> semaphores are enabled on BDW. A
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 01:05:52PM -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> The rest of the series was a reference for the records of what I had and
> let semaphores on bdw a bit more stable. But even with them we still get
> hungs so please consider only to get the revert for now.
Thanks for the reminder, pi
The rest of the series was a reference for the records of what I had and
let semaphores on bdw a bit more stable. But even with them we still get
hungs so please consider only to get the revert for now.
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Rodrigo Vivi
wrote:
> This reverts commit 521e62e49a42661a4
This reverts commit 521e62e49a42661a4ee0102644517dbe2f100a23.
Although POST_SYNC brought a bit of stability to Semaphores on BDW
it didn't solved all issues and some hungs can still occour when
semaphores are enabled on BDW. Also some sloweness can be found on some
igt tests, althoguth it apparent
