Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-05-14 15:51:04) > > > On 12/05/18 02:03, Chris Wilson wrote: > > If we trigger "too many" resets, the context and even the file, will be > > banend and subsequent execbufs should fail with -EIO. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> > > Does this replace gem_reset_stats@test_ban?
gem_reset_stats was queued to be rewritten from scratch a few years ago. In short, no it doesn't replace as they are asking slightly different questions. gem_eio is asking that if banned we get EIO. I have no idea what API gem_reset_stats is supposed to be asking about, since banning is not an aspect of DRM_IOCTL_I915_GET_RESET_STATS and so should be treated very lightly to avoid over-specificity. (Banning is an internal kernel policy in the name of DoS prevention and not a rigorous defense or subject to user control.) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
