<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [BAT ILK] gem_sync/basic-bsd fails / hangcheck timer elapsed"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94307#c9">Comment # 9</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - [BAT ILK] gem_sync/basic-bsd fails / hangcheck timer elapsed"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=94307">bug 94307</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk" title="Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>"> <span class="fn">Chris Wilson</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Tvrtko Ursulin from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=94307#c8">comment #8</a>)
<span class="quote">> Sighted on HSW igt@gem_storedw_loop@basic-blt as well now:
>
> /archive/results/CI_IGT_test/Patchwork_1521/</span >
Likely related (hard to tell without actual access, there are some potential
false positives in that hangcheck path as well) but since the hw is quite
different, it would be best to keep them separate. The Ironlake bug is
definitely that we don't apply a seqno-barrier for the BSD engine (but we do
for the render path hence the discrepancy). Whereas for HSW, it is possible
that the existing barrier is not long enough for that machine, or we have one
of the false positives etc.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>