[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: protect force_wake_(get|put) with the gt_lock

[Nicolas Kalkhof]

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for your Advice. Since it might take some time for the issue to appear I'll try to use a profiler to speed up the bughunt. I don't have any experience in profiling the kernel so this might take some time.... :(

I'll keep you posted.

Yours
Nic


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: "Daniel Vetter" <daniel at ffwll.ch>
Gesendet: Nov 7, 2011 5:56:38 PM
An: "Nicolas Kalkhof" <nkalkhof at web.de>
Betreff: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: protect force_wake_(get|put) with the gt_lock

>On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 05:39:44PM +0100, Nicolas Kalkhof wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> confirmed. Linus's linux-next.git shows the same behaviour. Until now
>> I've used a patched 3.1-rc-6+ Kernel from Dave Airlie's branch
>> (git://people.freedesktop.org/~airlied/linux' from Oct 26th.).
>> dmesg/syslog shows nothing special, neither does i915_error_state.
>>
>> Any advice?
>
>If the behaviour-difference is clear, you could try to bisect this. The
>alternative is to use your favourite system profiler and see where the
>cycles get wasted (either sysprof or perf). I suggest you'll try whatever
>approach your more familiar with first and then switch over to the other
>if the first one doesn't yield any clear results. If the difference is
>really clear, I'd start with the bisect (aside: don't restrict the bisect
>to any subdir, the change causing the regression could equally likely be
>somewhere in the core kernel).
>
>Yours, Daniel
>--
>Daniel Vetter
>Mail: daniel at ffwll.ch
>Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48


___________________________________________________________
SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und
kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192