On 05/03/18 03:03, Chris Wilson wrote:
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 <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> Cc: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenzi...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenzi...@intel.com> _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
