From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dma-buf/fence-array: fix deadlock in fence-array
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:44:48 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161017194448.GD11538@joana> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161017193938.GB29072@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
2016-10-17 Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:59:52PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> wrote:
> > > 2016-10-17 Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > >> Currently with fence-array, we have a potential deadlock situation. If we
> > >> fence_add_callback() on an array-fence, the array-fence's lock is acquired
> > >> first, and in it's ->enable_signaling() callback, it will install cb's on
> > >> it's array-member fences, so the array-member's lock is acquired second.
> > >>
> > >> But in the signal path, the array-member's lock is acquired first, and the
> > >> array-fence's lock acquired second.
> > >>
> > >> To solve that, always enabling signaling up-front (in the fence_array
> > >> constructor) without the fence_array's lock held.
> > >
> > > Do we always want to enable signaling for arrays? One of the things we
> > > removed from the Sync Framework was the need to enable signalling at
> > > creation time.
> > >
> > > Just merging fencing doesn't mean you want signaling, that is supposed
> > > to happen only when poll() is called on the sync file.
> >
> > It was something Maarten suggested, as an alternative to introducing a
> > wq into the mix or worse hacks..
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2016-October/120868.html
> >
> > I think I agree with him that it is an optimization that is unlikely
> > to be useful in the case of fence-arrays. If you need to wait on
> > multiple fences from different timelines, you probably aren't doing
> > that in hw.
>
> For 2 i915 fences, I definitely do not want signaling enabled at
> creation time.
Should we add arg flags for fence_array_create()? We already have
signal_on_any flag there. We can convert that arg to a bitfield.
Gustavo
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-17 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-17 18:40 [PATCH] dma-buf/fence-array: fix deadlock in fence-array Rob Clark
2016-10-17 18:52 ` Gustavo Padovan
2016-10-17 18:59 ` Rob Clark
2016-10-17 19:26 ` Gustavo Padovan
2016-10-17 19:39 ` Chris Wilson
2016-10-17 19:44 ` Gustavo Padovan [this message]
2016-10-18 7:41 ` Daniel Vetter
2016-10-18 11:49 ` Rob Clark
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161017194448.GD11538@joana \
--to=gustavo@padovan.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk \
--cc=robdclark@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.