From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com>
Cc: matthew.brost@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, faith@gfxstrand.net,
luben.tuikov@amd.com, christian.koenig@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v3] drm/sched: implement dynamic job-flow control
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:17:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231027091755.3635be36@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231026161431.5934-1-dakr@redhat.com>
Hi Danilo,
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:13:00 +0200
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com> wrote:
> +
> + /**
> + * @update_job_credits: Called once the scheduler is considering this
> + * job for execution.
> + *
> + * Drivers may use this to update the job's submission credits, which is
> + * useful to e.g. deduct the number of native fences which have been
> + * signaled meanwhile.
> + *
> + * The callback must either return the new number of submission credits
> + * for the given job, or zero if no update is required.
> + *
> + * This callback is optional.
> + */
> + u32 (*update_job_credits)(struct drm_sched_job *sched_job);
I'm copying my late reply to v2 here so it doesn't get lost:
I keep thinking it'd be simpler to make this a void function that
updates s_job->submission_credits directly. I also don't see the
problem with doing a sanity check on job->submission_credits. I mean,
if the driver is doing something silly, you can't do much to prevent it
anyway, except warn the user that something wrong has happened. If you
want to
WARN_ON(job->submission_credits == 0 ||
job->submission_credits > job_old_submission_credits);
that's fine. But none of this sanity checking has to do with the
function prototype/semantics, and I'm still not comfortable with this 0
=> no-change. If there's no change, we should just leave
job->submission_credits unchanged (or return job->submission_credits)
instead of inventing a new special case.
Regards,
Boris
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com>
Cc: airlied@gmail.com, daniel@ffwll.ch, matthew.brost@intel.com,
christian.koenig@amd.com, faith@gfxstrand.net,
luben.tuikov@amd.com, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH drm-misc-next v3] drm/sched: implement dynamic job-flow control
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:17:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231027091755.3635be36@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231026161431.5934-1-dakr@redhat.com>
Hi Danilo,
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 18:13:00 +0200
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@redhat.com> wrote:
> +
> + /**
> + * @update_job_credits: Called once the scheduler is considering this
> + * job for execution.
> + *
> + * Drivers may use this to update the job's submission credits, which is
> + * useful to e.g. deduct the number of native fences which have been
> + * signaled meanwhile.
> + *
> + * The callback must either return the new number of submission credits
> + * for the given job, or zero if no update is required.
> + *
> + * This callback is optional.
> + */
> + u32 (*update_job_credits)(struct drm_sched_job *sched_job);
I'm copying my late reply to v2 here so it doesn't get lost:
I keep thinking it'd be simpler to make this a void function that
updates s_job->submission_credits directly. I also don't see the
problem with doing a sanity check on job->submission_credits. I mean,
if the driver is doing something silly, you can't do much to prevent it
anyway, except warn the user that something wrong has happened. If you
want to
WARN_ON(job->submission_credits == 0 ||
job->submission_credits > job_old_submission_credits);
that's fine. But none of this sanity checking has to do with the
function prototype/semantics, and I'm still not comfortable with this 0
=> no-change. If there's no change, we should just leave
job->submission_credits unchanged (or return job->submission_credits)
instead of inventing a new special case.
Regards,
Boris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-27 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-26 16:13 [PATCH drm-misc-next v3] drm/sched: implement dynamic job-flow control Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-26 16:13 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-26 21:13 ` Luben Tuikov
2023-10-27 1:03 ` Luben Tuikov
2023-10-27 7:17 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2023-10-27 7:17 ` Boris Brezillon
[not found] ` <794f9b45-db0d-4261-aefe-7da2ad0ed3b7@redhat.com>
2023-10-27 16:26 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-28 3:34 ` Luben Tuikov
2023-10-27 7:22 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 7:22 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 7:32 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 7:32 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 7:35 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 7:35 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 7:39 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 7:39 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 7:44 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 8:22 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 8:22 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 9:06 ` Christian König
2023-10-27 10:17 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 10:17 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-30 7:38 ` Christian König
2023-10-30 7:38 ` Christian König
2023-10-30 17:56 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-30 17:56 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-31 13:20 ` Christian König
2023-10-31 15:01 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-31 15:01 ` Danilo Krummrich
[not found] ` <8d4a0870-f7d0-41ee-aa25-6488b6ea037a@amd.com>
[not found] ` <ZUPkfKzgKqhqQhMI@pollux>
[not found] ` <c91cf097-2ed3-4669-b9ae-b16b5f875b02@amd.com>
2023-11-06 16:46 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-11-06 16:46 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-11-07 9:13 ` Christian König
2023-11-07 9:13 ` Christian König
2023-11-07 13:03 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-11-07 13:03 ` Danilo Krummrich
2023-10-27 8:25 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-27 8:25 ` Boris Brezillon
[not found] ` <8e117f9f-a01c-4242-8781-b2ed4969513b@redhat.com>
2023-10-27 16:31 ` Boris Brezillon
2023-10-28 3:37 ` Luben Tuikov
[not found] ` <a9215c37-61cd-4fbc-9f80-217daacd96bd@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20231027184143.4427edb8@collabora.com>
2023-10-28 3:51 ` Luben Tuikov
2023-10-28 3:51 ` Luben Tuikov
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=20231027091755.3635be36@collabora.com \
--to=boris.brezillon@collabora.com \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dakr@redhat.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=faith@gfxstrand.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luben.tuikov@amd.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.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.