From: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH 1/3] drm/ttm: Clear the buffer object bulk move at individualize time
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 17:02:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230525150205.194098-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230525150205.194098-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Clearing the buffer object bulk move is closely tied to individualizing
the resv, since that is when we effectively detach the bo from a vm.
Clearing the bulk move also requires the bo resv, which we have readily
locked at individualizing time without clobbering the much wider vm
lock.
So Clear the buffer object bulk_move at individualizing time, and update
the code comments.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
index bd5dae4d1624..57cc9f845adc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
@@ -193,20 +193,33 @@ static int ttm_bo_individualize_resv(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo)
BUG_ON(!dma_resv_trylock(&bo->base._resv));
r = dma_resv_copy_fences(&bo->base._resv, bo->base.resv);
- dma_resv_unlock(&bo->base._resv);
- if (r)
- return r;
- if (bo->type != ttm_bo_type_sg) {
- /* This works because the BO is about to be destroyed and nobody
- * reference it any more. The only tricky case is the trylock on
- * the resv object while holding the lru_lock.
+ if (!r && bo->type != ttm_bo_type_sg) {
+ /*
+ * The TTM bo refcount is now zero and hence nobody will
+ * therefore try to lock the bo at this point: the LRU
+ * list lookups will trylock even if the refcount is zero,
+ * but will only do that under the LRU lock and will
+ * then immediately back off under the same LRU lock when it
+ * sees the zero refcount.
*/
spin_lock(&bo->bdev->lru_lock);
bo->base.resv = &bo->base._resv;
+
+ /* Since bulk move is closely tied with the shared resv,
+ * clear it when we have now individualized, if that was not
+ * done by the driver already.
+ */
+ if (bo->bulk_move) {
+ if (bo->resource)
+ ttm_resource_del_bulk_move(bo->resource, bo);
+ bo->bulk_move = NULL;
+ }
spin_unlock(&bo->bdev->lru_lock);
}
+ dma_resv_unlock(&bo->base._resv);
+
return r;
}
@@ -324,7 +337,6 @@ static void ttm_bo_release(struct kref *kref)
int ret;
WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->pin_count);
- WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->bulk_move);
if (!bo->deleted) {
ret = ttm_bo_individualize_resv(bo);
@@ -337,6 +349,8 @@ static void ttm_bo_release(struct kref *kref)
30 * HZ);
}
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->bulk_move);
+
if (bo->bdev->funcs->release_notify)
bo->bdev->funcs->release_notify(bo);
--
2.39.2
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: "Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
"Christian Koenig" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] drm/ttm: Clear the buffer object bulk move at individualize time
Date: Thu, 25 May 2023 17:02:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230525150205.194098-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230525150205.194098-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Clearing the buffer object bulk move is closely tied to individualizing
the resv, since that is when we effectively detach the bo from a vm.
Clearing the bulk move also requires the bo resv, which we have readily
locked at individualizing time without clobbering the much wider vm
lock.
So Clear the buffer object bulk_move at individualizing time, and update
the code comments.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
index bd5dae4d1624..57cc9f845adc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
@@ -193,20 +193,33 @@ static int ttm_bo_individualize_resv(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo)
BUG_ON(!dma_resv_trylock(&bo->base._resv));
r = dma_resv_copy_fences(&bo->base._resv, bo->base.resv);
- dma_resv_unlock(&bo->base._resv);
- if (r)
- return r;
- if (bo->type != ttm_bo_type_sg) {
- /* This works because the BO is about to be destroyed and nobody
- * reference it any more. The only tricky case is the trylock on
- * the resv object while holding the lru_lock.
+ if (!r && bo->type != ttm_bo_type_sg) {
+ /*
+ * The TTM bo refcount is now zero and hence nobody will
+ * therefore try to lock the bo at this point: the LRU
+ * list lookups will trylock even if the refcount is zero,
+ * but will only do that under the LRU lock and will
+ * then immediately back off under the same LRU lock when it
+ * sees the zero refcount.
*/
spin_lock(&bo->bdev->lru_lock);
bo->base.resv = &bo->base._resv;
+
+ /* Since bulk move is closely tied with the shared resv,
+ * clear it when we have now individualized, if that was not
+ * done by the driver already.
+ */
+ if (bo->bulk_move) {
+ if (bo->resource)
+ ttm_resource_del_bulk_move(bo->resource, bo);
+ bo->bulk_move = NULL;
+ }
spin_unlock(&bo->bdev->lru_lock);
}
+ dma_resv_unlock(&bo->base._resv);
+
return r;
}
@@ -324,7 +337,6 @@ static void ttm_bo_release(struct kref *kref)
int ret;
WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->pin_count);
- WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->bulk_move);
if (!bo->deleted) {
ret = ttm_bo_individualize_resv(bo);
@@ -337,6 +349,8 @@ static void ttm_bo_release(struct kref *kref)
30 * HZ);
}
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(bo->bulk_move);
+
if (bo->bdev->funcs->release_notify)
bo->bdev->funcs->release_notify(bo);
--
2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-25 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-25 15:02 [Intel-xe] [PATCH 0/3] drm/ttm: Reservation object individualization update Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:02 ` Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:02 ` Thomas Hellström [this message]
2023-05-25 15:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] drm/ttm: Clear the buffer object bulk move at individualize time Thomas Hellström
2023-06-01 10:38 ` [Intel-xe] " Christian König
2023-06-01 10:38 ` Christian König
2023-05-25 15:02 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 2/3] drm/ttm: Clean up bo individualizing somewhat Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:02 ` Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:02 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: Use a define for the resv wait timeout Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:02 ` Thomas Hellström
2023-05-25 15:04 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/ttm: Reservation object individualization update Patchwork
2023-05-25 15:06 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2023-05-25 15:10 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-05-25 15:39 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " Patchwork
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=20230525150205.194098-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--to=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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.