From: "Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>
To: "Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
"Thomas Hellström (VMware)" <thomas_os@shipmail.org>
Cc: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@vmware.com>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Huang, Ray" <Ray.Huang@amd.com>,
VMware Graphics <linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: remove ttm_bo_wait_unreserved
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 15:07:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11384851-661b-d84f-ec79-08c325f0f11b@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKMK7uHEAkjneZ5k=XfuJ9hftErt7F_UOQoZaUQkpoDkBiCX+w@mail.gmail.com>
Am 21.08.19 um 16:47 schrieb Daniel Vetter:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 4:27 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
> <thomas_os@shipmail.org> wrote:
>> On 8/21/19 4:09 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
>>> <thomas_os@shipmail.org> wrote:
>>>> On 8/21/19 2:40 PM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
>>>>> On 8/20/19 4:53 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>>> [SNIP]
>> but to keep the mm latency optimization using the RETRY functionality:
> Still no idea why this is needed? All the comments here and the code
> and history seem like they've been about the mmap_sem vs dma_resv
> inversion between driver ioctls and fault handling here. Once that's
> officially fixed there's no reason to play games here and retry loops
> - previously that was necessary because the old ttm_bo_vm_fault had a
> busy spin and that's definitely not nice. If it's needed I think it
> should be a second patch on top, to keep this all clear. I had to
> audit an enormous amount of code, I'd like to make sure I didn't miss
> anything before we start to make this super fancy again. Further
> patches on top is obviously all fine with me.
I think this is just an optimization to not hold the mmap_sem while
waiting for the dma_resv lock.
I agree that it shouldn't be necessary, but maybe it's a good idea for
performance. I'm also OK with removing it, cause I'm not sure if it's
worth it.
But Thomas noted correctly that we should probably do it in a separate
patch so that when somebody points out "Hey my system is slower now!"
he's able to bisect to the change.
Christian.
> -Daniel
>
>> Thanks,
>> Thomas
>>
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-21 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-20 14:53 [PATCH 0/3] RFC/T: dma_resv vs. mmap_sem Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 14:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 14:56 ` Koenig, Christian
2019-08-21 15:44 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 14:58 ` Chris Wilson
2019-08-21 15:54 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 16:34 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 17:06 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 18:11 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 18:27 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 19:51 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-22 6:42 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-22 6:47 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 14:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] drm/nouveau: slowpath for pushbuf ioctl Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 14:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: remove ttm_bo_wait_unreserved Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 15:16 ` Koenig, Christian
2019-08-20 15:21 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 15:34 ` Koenig, Christian
2019-08-20 15:41 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 15:45 ` Koenig, Christian
2019-08-21 12:40 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 12:47 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 14:09 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 14:27 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 14:47 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 15:03 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 15:14 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 15:19 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 15:22 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 15:34 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 15:07 ` Koenig, Christian [this message]
2019-08-21 13:16 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 14:10 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 14:30 ` Thomas Hellström (VMware)
2019-08-21 14:42 ` Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 15:33 ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2019-08-20 18:35 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for RFC/T: dma_resv vs. mmap_sem Patchwork
2019-08-20 19:06 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2019-08-21 16:22 ` ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for RFC/T: dma_resv vs. mmap_sem (rev2) Patchwork
2019-08-21 16:47 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2019-08-21 18:52 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for RFC/T: dma_resv vs. mmap_sem (rev3) Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-08-21 21:50 [PATCH 1/3] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations Daniel Vetter
2019-08-21 21:50 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: remove ttm_bo_wait_unreserved Daniel Vetter
2019-10-21 14:50 [PATCH 0/3] dma_resv lockdep annotations/priming Daniel Vetter
2019-10-21 14:50 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: remove ttm_bo_wait_unreserved Daniel Vetter
2019-11-04 17:37 [PATCH 1/3] dma_resv: prime lockdep annotations Daniel Vetter
2019-11-04 17:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] drm/ttm: remove ttm_bo_wait_unreserved Daniel Vetter
2019-11-06 10:24 ` Daniel Vetter
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=11384851-661b-d84f-ec79-08c325f0f11b@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=Ray.Huang@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com \
--cc=thellstrom@vmware.com \
--cc=thomas_os@shipmail.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