Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] [RFC] intel: Non-LLC based non-blocking maps.

Ben Widawsky
2012-06-19T16:13:20Z

On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:22:03 +0100
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012 20:38:15 -0700, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
> > The history on this patch goes back quite a way. This time around, the
> > patch builds on top of the map_unsynchronized that Eric pushed. Eric's
> > patch attempted only to solve the problem for LLC machines. Unlike
> > my earlier versions of this patch (with the help from Daniel Vetter), we
> > do not attempt to cpu map objects in a unsynchronized manner.
> >
> > The concept is fairly simple - once a buffer is moved into the GTT
> > domain, we can assume it remains there unless we tell it otherwise (via
> > cpu map). It therefore stands to reason that as long as we can keep the
> > object in the GTT domain, and don't ever count on reading back contents,
> > things might just work. I believe as long as we are doing GTT mappings
> > only, we get to avoid worry about clflushing the dirtied cachelines, but
> > that could use some fact checking.
> >
> > The patch makes some assumptions about how the kernel does buffer
> > tracking, this could be conceived as an ABI dependency, but actually the
> > behavior is pretty confined. It exploits the fact the BOs are only moved
> > into the CPU domain under certain circumstances, and daintily dances
> > around those conditions. The main thing here is we assume MADV_WILLNEED
> > prevents the object from getting evicted.
> >
> > I am not aware of a good way to test it's effectiveness
> > performance-wise; but it introduces no regressions with piglit on my
> > ILK, or SNB.
>
> This is broken wrt to cache invalidation if I want to rewrite part of
> the buffer that already has been read by the GPU.
> -Chris
>

Well if you're talking about what I think you're talking about (ie. not
clflushing, but simply dealing with the GPUs internal caching). It's a
problem that has existed with all of the non-LLC non-blocking map
patches; and sort of the point of non-blocking maps. Play it fast and
loose, submit pipe controls if you get nervous.

Did I catch your meaning, or were you just talking about clflushing
stuff (we also miss chipset flush on really old platforms; I was
thinking of restricting this to ILK only)?

--
Ben Widawsky, Intel Open Source Technology Center