Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Speed up idle detection by kicking the tasklets

Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-07 09:54:27) > Chris Wilson writes: > > > Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-07 09:34:24) > >> Chris Wilson writes: > >> > >> > We rely on ksoftirqd to run in a timely fashion in order to drain the > >> > execlists

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Speed up idle detection by kicking the tasklets

Chris Wilson writes: > Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-07 09:34:24) >> Chris Wilson writes: >> >> > We rely on ksoftirqd to run in a timely fashion in order to drain the >> > execlists queue. Quite frequently, it does not. In some cases we may

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Speed up idle detection by kicking the tasklets

Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2018-05-07 09:34:24) > Chris Wilson writes: > > > We rely on ksoftirqd to run in a timely fashion in order to drain the > > execlists queue. Quite frequently, it does not. In some cases we may see > > latencies of over 200ms triggering our idle

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Speed up idle detection by kicking the tasklets

Chris Wilson writes: > We rely on ksoftirqd to run in a timely fashion in order to drain the > execlists queue. Quite frequently, it does not. In some cases we may see > latencies of over 200ms triggering our idle timeouts and forcing us to > declare the driver wedged!

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915: Speed up idle detection by kicking the tasklets

We rely on ksoftirqd to run in a timely fashion in order to drain the execlists queue. Quite frequently, it does not. In some cases we may see latencies of over 200ms triggering our idle timeouts and forcing us to declare the driver wedged! Thus we can speed up idle detection by bypassing