From: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drm: Mark up accesses of vblank->enabled outside of its spinlock
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:44:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170317204442.GW31595@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170317202030.24410-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 08:20:27PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Order the update to vblank->enabled after the timestamp is primed so
> that a concurrent unlocked reader will only see the vblank->enabled with
> the current timestamp.
>
> v2: vblank->enable is guarded by dev->vbl_lock not
> dev->vblank_time_lock, update the READ_ONCE accordingly.
The locking is indeed very confusing, and I don't know if it even makes
sense anymore. But this looks at least as sane as anything else here :)
For the series:
Reviewed-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> Do not add a READ_ONCE(vblank->enabled) inside the interrupt handler to
> avoid missing an interrupt whilst racing with enable_vblank()
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> index 53a526c7b24d..c47e07c89136 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_irq.c
> @@ -325,6 +325,8 @@ static void vblank_disable_and_save(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe)
> struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = &dev->vblank[pipe];
> unsigned long irqflags;
>
> + assert_spin_locked(&dev->vbl_lock);
> +
> /* Prevent vblank irq processing while disabling vblank irqs,
> * so no updates of timestamps or count can happen after we've
> * disabled. Needed to prevent races in case of delayed irq's.
> @@ -336,10 +338,8 @@ static void vblank_disable_and_save(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe)
> * calling the ->disable_vblank() operation in atomic context with the
> * hardware potentially runtime suspended.
> */
> - if (vblank->enabled) {
> + if (cmpxchg_relaxed(&vblank->enabled, true, false))
> __disable_vblank(dev, pipe);
> - vblank->enabled = false;
> - }
>
> /*
> * Always update the count and timestamp to maintain the
> @@ -384,7 +384,7 @@ void drm_vblank_cleanup(struct drm_device *dev)
> for (pipe = 0; pipe < dev->num_crtcs; pipe++) {
> struct drm_vblank_crtc *vblank = &dev->vblank[pipe];
>
> - WARN_ON(vblank->enabled &&
> + WARN_ON(READ_ONCE(vblank->enabled) &&
> drm_core_check_feature(dev, DRIVER_MODESET));
>
> del_timer_sync(&vblank->disable_timer);
> @@ -1105,11 +1105,16 @@ static int drm_vblank_enable(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe)
> */
> ret = __enable_vblank(dev, pipe);
> DRM_DEBUG("enabling vblank on crtc %u, ret: %d\n", pipe, ret);
> - if (ret)
> + if (ret) {
> atomic_dec(&vblank->refcount);
> - else {
> - vblank->enabled = true;
> + } else {
> drm_update_vblank_count(dev, pipe, 0);
> + /* drm_update_vblank_count() includes a wmb so we just
> + * need to ensure that the compiler emits the write
> + * to mark the vblank as enabled after the call
> + * to drm_update_vblank_count().
> + */
> + WRITE_ONCE(vblank->enabled, true);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -1517,7 +1522,7 @@ static int drm_queue_vblank_event(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe,
> * vblank disable, so no need for further locking. The reference from
> * drm_vblank_get() protects against vblank disable from another source.
> */
> - if (!vblank->enabled) {
> + if (!READ_ONCE(vblank->enabled)) {
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto err_unlock;
> }
> @@ -1644,7 +1649,7 @@ int drm_wait_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> DRM_WAIT_ON(ret, vblank->queue, 3 * HZ,
> (((drm_vblank_count(dev, pipe) -
> vblwait->request.sequence) <= (1 << 23)) ||
> - !vblank->enabled ||
> + !READ_ONCE(vblank->enabled) ||
> !dev->irq_enabled));
> }
>
> --
> 2.11.0
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-17 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-17 20:20 [PATCH v2 1/4] drm: Mark up accesses of vblank->enabled outside of its spinlock Chris Wilson
2017-03-17 20:20 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] drm: vblank cannot be enabled if dev->irq_enabled is false Chris Wilson
2017-03-17 20:20 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] drm: Refactor vblank sequence number comparison Chris Wilson
2017-03-22 8:54 ` Michel Dänzer
2017-03-22 10:06 ` [PATCH v2] " Chris Wilson
2017-03-23 3:23 ` Michel Dänzer
2017-03-29 11:32 ` Ville Syrjälä
2017-03-17 20:20 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] drm: Peek at the current counter/timestamp for vblank queries Chris Wilson
2017-03-17 20:44 ` Ville Syrjälä [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=20170317204442.GW31595@intel.com \
--to=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).