<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED FIXED - [CI][DRMTIP] igt@gem_exec_schedule@semaphore-user - warn - Failed assertion: !"GPU hung"" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110367#c5">Comment # 5</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_RESOLVED bz_closed" title="RESOLVED FIXED - [CI][DRMTIP] igt@gem_exec_schedule@semaphore-user - warn - Failed assertion: !"GPU hung"" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110367">bug 110367</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:martin.peres@free.fr" title="Martin Peres <martin.peres@free.fr>"> Martin Peres</a> <pre>(In reply to Chris Wilson from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=110367#c2">comment #2</a>) > commit bac24f59f45419a3853af2f58130cb82b7bdca64 > Author: Chris Wilson <<a href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a>> > Date: Fri Mar 29 13:40:24 2019 +0000 > > drm/i915/execlists: Enable coarse preemption boundaries for gen8 > > When we introduced preemption, we chose to keep it disabled for gen8 as > supporting preemption inside GPGPU user batches required various w/a in > userspace. Since then, the desire to preempt long queues of requests > between batches (e.g. within busywaiting semaphores) has grown. So allow > arbitration within the busywaits and between requests, but disable > arbitration within user batches so that we can preempt between requests > and not risk breaking GPGPU. > > However, since this preemption is much coarser and doesn't interfere > with userspace, we decline to include it amongst the scheduler > capabilities. (This is also required for us to skip over the preemption > selftests that expect to be able to preempt user batches.) > > Michal suggested that we could perhaps allow preemption inside gen8 > userspace batches if we can satisfy ourselves that the default > preemption settings are viable with existing userspace (principally > OpenCL which already should carry any known workaround). We could then > merge the two code paths back into one, even dropping the artifical > has-preemption device feature flag. > > Testcase: igt/gem_exec_scheduler/semaphore-user > References: beecec901790 ("drm/i915/execlists: Preemption!") > Fixes: e88619646971 ("drm/i915: Use HW semaphores for inter-engine > synchronisation on gen8+") > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <<a href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a>> > Cc: Michal Winiarski <<a href="mailto:michal.winiarski@intel.com">michal.winiarski@intel.com</a>> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <<a href="mailto:tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com">tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com</a>> > Reviewed-by: Michal Winiarski <<a href="mailto:michal.winiarski@intel.com">michal.winiarski@intel.com</a>> #irc > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <<a href="mailto:tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com">tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com</a>> > Link: > <a href="https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190329134024.5254-1">https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190329134024.5254-1</a>- > <a href="mailto:chris@chris-wilson.co.uk">chris@chris-wilson.co.uk</a> Thanks, the bug was seen twice on one drmtip run, and not for the following 6 runs. This means we are over the 10x rule and can consider this fixed. Thanks!</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li> <li>You are on the CC list for the bug.</li> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>