From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>
Cc: <niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com>, <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Always invalidate TLBs on userptr invalidation
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:21:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <acH1IT6MBYvSf2GH@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260323211743.285064-1-stuart.summers@intel.com>
On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 09:17:42PM +0000, Stuart Summers wrote:
> Right now we are only invalidating TLBs when we are
> running in fault mode. For non-fault mode based userptr
> VMs, we then rely on context switches after an MMAP has
> happened to ensure the TLB is clean for the next submission.
>
> With context based TLB invalidation, we can no longer rely
> on the implicit invalidation happening during context switch,
> so remove the fault mode limiter and simply always perform
> that invalidation.
>
> I was able to see this behavior using the following test:
> xe_exec_compute_mode --r twice-userptr-invalidate
>
Hmm, this implies that preempt fences don't issue a TLB invalidation...
I thought we landed on preempt fences do a TLB invalidation in offline
discussions.
We may have more work to do here wrt context based TLB invalidations.
I think BO move path likely also needs to be updated then too.
> Signed-off-by: Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_userptr.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_userptr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_userptr.c
> index 6761005c0b90..dfd679dd98d9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_userptr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_userptr.c
> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ xe_vma_userptr_do_inval(struct xe_vm *vm, struct xe_userptr_vma *uvma, bool is_d
> false, MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT);
> XE_WARN_ON(err <= 0);
>
> - if (xe_vm_in_fault_mode(vm) && userptr->initial_bind) {
> + if (userptr->initial_bind) {
Should be change this if statement based on hardware support?
Matt
> if (!userptr->finish_inuse) {
> /*
> * Defer the TLB wait to an extra pass so the caller
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-24 2:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-23 21:17 [PATCH] drm/xe: Always invalidate TLBs on userptr invalidation Stuart Summers
2026-03-23 21:24 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for " Patchwork
2026-03-23 22:01 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2026-03-24 2:21 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2026-03-24 14:53 ` [PATCH] " Summers, Stuart
2026-03-24 21:51 ` Summers, Stuart
2026-03-24 23:53 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 20:35 ` Summers, Stuart
2026-03-25 21:47 ` Matthew Brost
2026-03-25 22:21 ` Summers, Stuart
2026-03-24 6:12 ` ✓ Xe.CI.FULL: success for " 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=acH1IT6MBYvSf2GH@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=niranjana.vishwanathapura@intel.com \
--cc=stuart.summers@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.