From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Friedrich Vock <friedrich.vock@gmx.de>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Pierre-Loup Griffais <pgriffais@valvesoftware.com>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.com>,
Bas Nieuwenhuizen <bas@basnieuwenhuizen.nl>,
Joshua Ashton <joshua@froggi.es>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 16/18] drm/amdgpu: Implement SET_PRIORITY GEM op
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 09:15:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0031da6c-3064-4603-9af4-ae684842e4e1@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <38a23351-6f16-462b-be02-187829e3c2c2@gmx.de>
Am 25.04.24 um 09:06 schrieb Friedrich Vock:
> On 25.04.24 08:58, Christian König wrote:
>> Am 25.04.24 um 08:46 schrieb Friedrich Vock:
>>> On 25.04.24 08:32, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Am 24.04.24 um 18:57 schrieb Friedrich Vock:
>>>>> Used by userspace to adjust buffer priorities in response to
>>>>> changes in
>>>>> application demand and memory pressure.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, that was discussed over and over again. One big design criteria
>>>> is that we can't have global priorities from userspace!
>>>>
>>>> The background here is that this can trivially be abused.
>>>>
>>> I see your point when apps are allowed to prioritize themselves above
>>> other apps, and I agree that should probably be disallowed at least for
>>> unprivileged apps.
>>>
>>> Disallowing this is a pretty trivial change though, and I don't really
>>> see the abuse potential in being able to downgrade your own priority?
>>
>> Yeah, I know what you mean and I'm also leaning towards that
>> argumentation. But another good point is also that it doesn't actually
>> help.
>>
>> For example when you have desktop apps fighting with a game, you
>> probably don't want to use static priorities, but rather evict the
>> apps which are inactive and keep the apps which are active in the
>> background.
>>
> Sadly things are not as simple as "evict everything from app 1, keep
> everything from app 2 active". The simplest failure case of this is
> games that already oversubscribe VRAM on their own. Keeping the whole
> app inside VRAM is literally impossible there, and it helps a lot to
> know which buffers the app is most happy with evicting.
>> In other words the priority just tells you which stuff from each app
>> to evict first, but not which app to globally throw out.
>>
> Yeah, but per-buffer priority system could do both of these.
Yeah, but we already have that. See amdgpu_bo_list_entry_cmp() and
amdgpu_bo_list_create().
This is the per application priority which can be used by userspace to
give priority to each BO in a submission (or application wide).
The problem is rather that amdgpu/TTM never really made good use of that
information.
Regards,
Christian.
>
> Regards,
> Friedrich
>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Friedrich
>>>
>>>> What we can do is to have per process priorities, but that needs to be
>>>> in the VM subsystem.
>>>>
>>>> That's also the reason why I personally think that the handling
>>>> shouldn't be inside TTM at all.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Christian.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Friedrich Vock <friedrich.vock@gmx.de>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gem.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h | 1 +
>>>>> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gem.c
>>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gem.c
>>>>> index 5ca13e2e50f50..6107810a9c205 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gem.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_gem.c
>>>>> @@ -836,8 +836,10 @@ int amdgpu_gem_op_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>>>> void *data,
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct amdgpu_device *adev = drm_to_adev(dev);
>>>>> struct drm_amdgpu_gem_op *args = data;
>>>>> + struct ttm_resource_manager *man;
>>>>> struct drm_gem_object *gobj;
>>>>> struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *base;
>>>>> + struct ttm_operation_ctx ctx;
>>>>> struct amdgpu_bo *robj;
>>>>> int r;
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -851,6 +853,9 @@ int amdgpu_gem_op_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>>>> void *data,
>>>>> if (unlikely(r))
>>>>> goto out;
>>>>>
>>>>> + memset(&ctx, 0, sizeof(ctx));
>>>>> + ctx.interruptible = true;
>>>>> +
>>>>> switch (args->op) {
>>>>> case AMDGPU_GEM_OP_GET_GEM_CREATE_INFO: {
>>>>> struct drm_amdgpu_gem_create_in info;
>>>>> @@ -898,6 +903,21 @@ int amdgpu_gem_op_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev,
>>>>> void *data,
>>>>>
>>>>> amdgpu_bo_unreserve(robj);
>>>>> break;
>>>>> + case AMDGPU_GEM_OP_SET_PRIORITY:
>>>>> + if (args->value > AMDGPU_BO_PRIORITY_MAX_USER)
>>>>> + args->value = AMDGPU_BO_PRIORITY_MAX_USER;
>>>>> + ttm_bo_update_priority(&robj->tbo, args->value);
>>>>> + if (robj->tbo.evicted_type != TTM_NUM_MEM_TYPES) {
>>>>> + ttm_bo_try_unevict(&robj->tbo, &ctx);
>>>>> + amdgpu_bo_unreserve(robj);
>>>>> + } else {
>>>>> + amdgpu_bo_unreserve(robj);
>>>>> + man = ttm_manager_type(robj->tbo.bdev,
>>>>> + robj->tbo.resource->mem_type);
>>>>> + ttm_mem_unevict_evicted(robj->tbo.bdev, man,
>>>>> + true);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> default:
>>>>> amdgpu_bo_unreserve(robj);
>>>>> r = -EINVAL;
>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h
>>>>> b/include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h
>>>>> index bdbe6b262a78d..53552dd489b9b 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/amdgpu_drm.h
>>>>> @@ -531,6 +531,7 @@ union drm_amdgpu_wait_fences {
>>>>>
>>>>> #define AMDGPU_GEM_OP_GET_GEM_CREATE_INFO 0
>>>>> #define AMDGPU_GEM_OP_SET_PLACEMENT 1
>>>>> +#define AMDGPU_GEM_OP_SET_PRIORITY 2
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Sets or returns a value associated with a buffer. */
>>>>> struct drm_amdgpu_gem_op {
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.44.0
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-25 7:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-24 16:56 [RFC PATCH 00/18] TTM interface for managing VRAM oversubscription Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 01/18] drm/ttm: Add tracking for evicted memory Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 02/18] drm/ttm: Add per-BO eviction tracking Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:18 ` Christian König
2024-04-25 19:02 ` Matthew Brost
2024-04-26 6:27 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 03/18] drm/ttm: Implement BO " Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 04/18] drm/ttm: Add driver funcs for uneviction control Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 05/18] drm/ttm: Add option to evict no BOs in operation Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:20 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 06/18] drm/ttm: Add public buffer eviction/uneviction functions Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 07/18] drm/amdgpu: Add TTM uneviction control functions Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 08/18] drm/amdgpu: Don't try moving BOs to preferred domain before submit Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:36 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:56 ` [RFC PATCH 09/18] drm/amdgpu: Don't mark VRAM as a busy placement for VRAM|GTT resources Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:24 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 10/18] drm/amdgpu: Don't add GTT to initial domains after failing to allocate VRAM Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:25 ` Christian König
2024-04-25 7:39 ` Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 7:54 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 11/18] drm/ttm: Bump BO priority count Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 12/18] drm/ttm: Do not evict BOs with higher priority Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:26 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 13/18] drm/ttm: Implement ttm_bo_update_priority Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:29 ` Christian König
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 14/18] drm/ttm: Consider BOs placed in non-favorite locations evicted Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 15/18] drm/amdgpu: Set a default priority for user/kernel BOs Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 16/18] drm/amdgpu: Implement SET_PRIORITY GEM op Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:32 ` Christian König
2024-04-25 6:46 ` Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:58 ` Christian König
2024-04-25 7:06 ` Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 7:15 ` Christian König [this message]
2024-04-25 7:39 ` Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 17/18] drm/amdgpu: Implement EVICTED_VRAM query Friedrich Vock
2024-04-24 16:57 ` [RFC PATCH 18/18] drm/amdgpu: Bump minor version Friedrich Vock
2024-04-25 6:54 ` [RFC PATCH 00/18] TTM interface for managing VRAM oversubscription Christian König
2024-04-25 13:22 ` Marek Olšák
2024-04-25 13:33 ` Christian König
2024-05-02 14:23 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2024-05-13 13:44 ` Friedrich Vock
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=0031da6c-3064-4603-9af4-ae684842e4e1@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=bas@basnieuwenhuizen.nl \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=friedrich.vock@gmx.de \
--cc=joshua@froggi.es \
--cc=pgriffais@valvesoftware.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@igalia.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox