<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Ping on the question</p>
<p>Andrey<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2022-01-05 1:11 p.m., Andrey
Grodzovsky wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:c64c933f-498d-a2d9-fe63-058c6f1bed9c@amd.com">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #007cff;">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #007cff;">Also, what about
having the reset_active or in_reset flag in the reset_domain
itself?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Of hand that sounds like a good idea.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
What then about the adev->reset_sem semaphore ? Should we also
move this to reset_domain ? Both of the moves have functional
<br>
implications only for XGMI case because there will be contention
over accessing those single instance variables from multiple
devices
<br>
while now each device has it's own copy.
<br>
<br>
What benefit the centralization into reset_domain gives - is it
for example to prevent one device in a hive trying to access
through MMIO another one's
<br>
VRAM (shared FB memory) while the other one goes through reset ?
<br>
<br>
Andrey
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>