[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Initialise breadcrumb lists on the virtual engine

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 29/09/2019 09:33, Chris Wilson wrote:
> With deferring the breadcrumb signalling to the virtual engine (thanks
> preempt-to-busy) we need to make sure the lists and irq-worker are ready
> to send a signal.
> 
> Fixes: cb2377a919bb ("drm/i915: Fixup preempt-to-busy vs reset of a virtual request")
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> index 45fe87a59796..ded618bca587 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c
> @@ -4177,6 +4177,7 @@ intel_execlists_create_virtual(struct i915_gem_context *ctx,
>   	snprintf(ve->base.name, sizeof(ve->base.name), "virtual");
>   
>   	intel_engine_init_active(&ve->base, ENGINE_VIRTUAL);
> +	intel_engine_init_breadcrumbs(&ve->base);
>   
>   	intel_engine_init_execlists(&ve->base);
>   
> 

__intel_gt_set_wedged -> nop_submit_request? But how does the commit 
from fixes come into play? That one was about not looking at the engine 
timeline when we detect virtual request is hanging as far as I remember.

Regards,

Tvrtko