[Bug 105343] [CI] igt at gem_exec_schedule@pi-ringfull-bsd2 - fail - Failed assertion: __execbuf(fd, &execbuf) == -4

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105343

Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> ---
commit e3a0ed9855a2e9d77cfd0c770ceadac5b7030e4e (HEAD, upstream/master)
Author: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
Date:   Mon Mar 5 10:51:06 2018 +0000

    Bump measure_ring_size() timer interval

    It appears that waiting for a 100us period whereby we are unable to
    submit another batch and proclaim the ring full, may have the false
    positive where the scheduler intervenes and we are signalled twice
    before having slept on ring space. Increasing the interval reduces the
    likelihood of the scheduler stealing the cpu from us, but does not
    eliminate it. Fortuitously it appears to be a rare false positive.

    For the library routine, we can fork a RT process but that seems a bit
    overkill!

    References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105343
    Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
    Cc: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano at intel.com>
    Reviewed-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano at intel.com>

Assuming fixed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx-bugs/attachments/20180307/2da136c3/attachment-0001.html>