From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/7] drm/i915: refactor duplicate object vmap functions (the final rework?)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 12:23:44 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56F28AD0.4010807@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56F16407.9010803@intel.com>
On 22/03/16 15:25, Dave Gordon wrote:
> On 08/03/16 09:43, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>>
>> On 02/03/16 15:40, Dave Gordon wrote:
>>> On 02/03/16 12:08, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 04:33:58PM +0000, Dave Gordon wrote:
>>>>> This is essentially Chris Wilson's patch of a similar name,
>>>>> reworked on
>>>>> top of Alex Dai's recent patch:
>>>>> | drm/i915: Add i915_gem_object_vmap to map GEM object to virtual
>>>>> space
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris' original commentary said:
>>>>> | We now have two implementations for vmapping a whole object, one for
>>>>> | dma-buf and one for the ringbuffer. If we couple the vmapping into
>>>>> | the obj->pages lifetime, then we can reuse an obj->vmapping for both
>>>>> | and at the same time couple it into the shrinker.
>>>>> |
>>>>> | v2: Mark the failable kmalloc() as __GFP_NOWARN (vsyrjala)
>>>>> | v3: Call unpin_vmap from the right dmabuf unmapper
>>>>>
>>>>> v4: reimplements the same functionality, but now as wrappers round the
>>>>> recently-introduced i915_gem_object_vmap_range() from Alex's
>>>>> patch
>>>>> mentioned above.
>>>>>
>>>>> v5: separated from two minor but unrelated changes [Tvrtko Ursulin];
>>>>> this is the third and most substantial portion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Decided not to hold onto vmappings after the pin count goes to
>>>>> zero.
>>>>> This may reduce the benefit of Chris' scheme a bit, but does
>>>>> avoid
>>>>> any increased risk of exhausting kernel vmap space on 32-bit
>>>>> kernels
>>>>> [Tvrtko Ursulin]. Potentially, the vunmap() could be deferred
>>>>> until
>>>>> the put_pages() stage if a suitable notifier were written, but
>>>>> we're
>>>>> not doing that here. Nonetheless, the simplification of both
>>>>> dmabuf
>>>>> and ringbuffer code makes it worthwhile in its own right.
>>>>>
>>>>> v6: change BUG_ON() to WARN_ON(). [Tvrtko Ursulin]
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@intel.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>>>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>>> Cc: Alex Dai <yu.dai@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 22 ++++++++++++++-----
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 39
>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_dmabuf.c | 36
>>>>> ++++--------------------------
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.c | 9 ++++----
>>>>> 4 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>>> index b3ae191..f1ad3b3 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
>>>>> @@ -2172,10 +2172,7 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_object {
>>>>> struct scatterlist *sg;
>>>>> int last;
>>>>> } get_page;
>>>>> -
>>>>> - /* prime dma-buf support */
>>>>> - void *dma_buf_vmapping;
>>>>> - int vmapping_count;
>>>>> + void *vmapping;
>>>>>
>>>>> /** Breadcrumb of last rendering to the buffer.
>>>>> * There can only be one writer, but we allow for multiple
>>>>> readers.
>>>>> @@ -2980,7 +2977,22 @@ static inline void
>>>>> i915_gem_object_pin_pages(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
>>>>> static inline void i915_gem_object_unpin_pages(struct
>>>>> drm_i915_gem_object *obj)
>>>>> {
>>>>> BUG_ON(obj->pages_pin_count == 0);
>>>>> - obj->pages_pin_count--;
>>>>> + if (--obj->pages_pin_count == 0 && obj->vmapping) {
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * Releasing the vmapping here may yield less benefit than
>>>>> + * if we kept it until put_pages(), but on the other hand
>>>>
>>>> Yields no benefit. Makes the patch pointless.
>>>> Plus there is also pressure to enable WC vmaps.
>>>> -Chris
>>>
>>> The patch is not pointless -- at the very least, it:
>>> + reduces the size of "struct drm_i915_gem_object" (OK, only by 4 bytes)
>>> + replaces special-function code for dmabufs with more generic code that
>>> can be reused for other objects (for now, ringbuffers; next GuC-shared
>>> objects -- see Alex's patch "drm/i915/guc: Simplify code by keeping vmap
>>> of guc_client object" which will eliminate lot of short-term
>>> kmap_atomics with persistent kmaps).
>>> + provides a shorthand for the sequence of { get_pages(), pin_pages(),
>>> vmap() } so we don't have to open-code it (and deal with all the error
>>> paths) in several different places
>>>
>>> Thus there is an engineering benefit even if this version doesn't
>>> provide any performance benefit. And if, as the next step, you want to
>>> extend the vmap lifetime, you just have to remove those few lines in
>>> i915_gem_object_unpin_pages() and incorporate the notifier that you
>>> prototyped earlier -- if it actually provides any performance boost.
>>
>> So Chris do you ack on this series on the basis of the above - that it
>> consolidates the current code and following GuC patch will be another
>> user of the pin_vmap API?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tvrtko
>
> I see that Chris has posted a patch to add a vmap notifier, although it
> hasn't yet got its R-B. So I suggest we merge this patch series now, and
> then update it by moving the vunmap() into put_pages() when Chris has
> the notifier finalised. IIRC you wanted Daniel to merge the new DRM bits
> (patches 3 and 7, which already have their R-Bs) ?
>
> Or we can merge 1-5+7, all of which already have R-Bs, and I can turn
> 6 into a GuC-private version, without the benefit of simplifying and
> unifying the corresponding object-mapping management in the DMAbuf and
> ringbuffer code.
>
> Or I can repost just the bits that don't rely on drm_malloc_gfp() and
> exclude the final patch so that we can move ahead on the bits we
> actually want for improving the performance of the GuC interface and
> reducing the number of kmap_atomic calls elsewhere, and then the omitted
> bits can be added back once drm_malloc_gfp() has been merged upstream
> and the notifier is working.
I've chatted with Chris and Daniel on IRC and here is the summary and
way forward I think.
1. Drop 6/7, and probably 7/7 unless you can get etnaviv people to r-b/ack.
2. Add the patch which fixes the actual scheduling while atomic in GuC
to the end of the series with a Bugzila & Testcase tag in that patch.
(This step should allow Chris to provide an Acked-by.)
3. Cc dri-devel on all patches of the series since some touch DRM core.
(This is standard recommended practice).
4. Rebase & resend as new series.
5. Review the new patch in the series.
6. Explain CI results.
7. Merge. :)
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-23 12:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-01 16:33 [PATCH v7 0/7] Reorganise calls to vmap() GEM objects Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 1/7] drm/i915: deduplicate intel_pin_and_map_ringbuffer_obj() error handling Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 2/7] drm/i915: move locking in i915_gem_unmap_dma_buf() Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 3/7] drm,i915: introduce drm_malloc_gfp() Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 4/7] drm/i915: introduce and use i915_gem_object_vmap_range() Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 17:39 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 5/7] drm/i915: optimise i915_gem_object_vmap_range() for small objects Dave Gordon
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 6/7] drm/i915: refactor duplicate object vmap functions (the final rework?) Dave Gordon
2016-03-02 12:08 ` Chris Wilson
2016-03-02 15:40 ` Dave Gordon
2016-03-08 9:43 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-03-22 15:25 ` Dave Gordon
2016-03-23 12:23 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2016-03-01 16:33 ` [PATCH v7 7/7] drm: add parameter-order checking to drm memory allocators Dave Gordon
2016-03-02 15:00 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2016-03-02 6:54 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: warning for Reorganise calls to vmap() GEM objects (rev5) Patchwork
2016-03-02 12:38 ` Dave Gordon
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=56F28AD0.4010807@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=david.s.gordon@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@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.