From: "Alexandre Courbot" <acourbot@nvidia.com>
To: "Eliot Courtney" <ecourtney@nvidia.com>
Cc: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>,
"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@google.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
"Alistair Popple" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
"Timur Tabi" <ttabi@nvidia.com>, "Zhi Wang" <zhiw@nvidia.com>,
<nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpu: nova-core: gsp: cmdq: do not sleep in wait_for_msg
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 14:21:52 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DMHX5VRNFYLQ.11FZIS5422ZS6@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DMHW4DNFAF18.1N88RMWYD4TRY@nvidia.com>
On Fri Oct 30, 2026 at 1:32 PM JST, Eliot Courtney wrote:
> On Fri Oct 30, 2026 at 12:21 PM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> If a message is not immediately available on the queue, `wait_for_msg`
>> sleeps for 1 millisecond before checking again. This is 3 orders of
>> magnitude more than Nouveau (which sleeps for 1 microsecond) or OpenRM
>> (which does not sleep at all and busy-polls) and is way too much, as GSP
>> commands are expected to be processed much faster than that.
>>
>> Set the sleep time to `Delta::ZERO` to mirror OpenRM's behavior. This
>> makes the CPU busy-loop with a call to `cpu_relax` at each iteration,
>> keeping latency to a minimum.
>>
>> Slightly higher values like 2us were also considered, but with such low
>> values `fsleep` also busy-waits, and would thus only add latency for no
>> benefit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs | 7 +++----
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs b/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs
>> index e6d9a97130ea..d8c00df012bf 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/nova-core/gsp/cmdq.rs
>> @@ -590,9 +590,8 @@ fn send_command_element<E: CommandElement>(&mut self, command: E) -> Result {
>> fn wait_for_msg(&self, timeout: Delta) -> Result<GspMessage<'_>> {
>> // Wait for a message to arrive from the GSP.
>> let (slice_1, slice_2) = if timeout == Delta::ZERO {
>> - // If `timeout == Delta::ZERO`, check the message queue once as `read_poll_timeout` can
>> - // potentially sleep if the clock hasn't moved forward while the condition was being
>> - // checked.
>> + // If `timeout == Delta::ZERO`, check the message queue exactly once instead of calling
>> + // `read_poll_timeout`, which would keep polling until the clock moves forward.
>> let slices = self.gsp_mem.driver_read_area();
>> if !slices.0.is_empty() {
>> Ok(slices)
>> @@ -603,7 +602,7 @@ fn wait_for_msg(&self, timeout: Delta) -> Result<GspMessage<'_>> {
>> read_poll_timeout(
>> || Ok(self.gsp_mem.driver_read_area()),
>> |driver_area| !driver_area.0.is_empty(),
>> - Delta::from_millis(1),
>> + Delta::ZERO,
>> timeout,
>> )
>> }
>>
>> ---
>> base-commit: 9b840ed71d34ff545e3ada8be2ad5daaae542b50
>> change-id: 20261030-cmdq_wait_msg_timeout-26df11234d10
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@nvidia.com>
>
> Previously we had a discussion about Delta::ZERO waits [1] and Danilo
> had some concerns about creating unnecessary contention by reading
> coherent memory extremely often. Also, AFAICT `fsleep`'s busy wait is a
> bit nicer than just spinning. WDYT? I think switching this to
> Delta::from_micros(1) is probably better.
Anything works for me as long as we reduce the spinning-induced latency
to something reasonable. I'll resping with `from_micros(1)`.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-30 5:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-30 3:21 [PATCH] gpu: nova-core: gsp: cmdq: do not sleep in wait_for_msg Alexandre Courbot
2026-10-30 4:32 ` Eliot Courtney
2026-10-30 5:21 ` Alexandre Courbot [this message]
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=DMHX5VRNFYLQ.11FZIS5422ZS6@nvidia.com \
--to=acourbot@nvidia.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=aliceryhl@google.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=ecourtney@nvidia.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nova-gpu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=ttabi@nvidia.com \
--cc=zhiw@nvidia.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.