public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: "Michael H. Nguyen" <michael.h.nguyen@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] Command parser batch buffer copy
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 10:17:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141203091732.GY32117@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <547E35CC.90900@intel.com>

On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 01:57:32PM -0800, Michael H. Nguyen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/02/2014 03:13 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 02:39:51PM -0800, Michael H. Nguyen wrote:
> >> Re: madvise on creation
> >>
> >> Were you referring to this?
> >>
> >> from http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx/2014-November/055060.htm
> >>
> >> 	obj = i915_gem_obj_alloc();
> >> 	i915_gem_object_get_pages(obj);
> >> 	obj->madv = I915_MADV_DONTNEED;
> >>
> >> If so, I don't understand . _get is returning obj and it'll be
> >> needed so would expect to set 'obj->madv = I915_MADV_WILLNEED' which
> >> is the case now.
> > 
> > madv is only evaluated at get_pages(). Once you have the pages, you keep
> > them until the shrinker purges them. Hence you only need to call
> > get_pages() once and set obj->madv = DONTNEED afterwards, and then you
> > only need to check whether the obj is purged before your next reuse (you
> > do not need to touch madv ever again). Whilst the object is active it is
> > a low priority target for the shrinker. That greatly simplifies the pool
> > code.
> 
> I have a feeling this may make the driver less readable imo and could
> also require a re-write of the series. The current code may call
> get_pages() more than once and occurs outside of the batch_pool
> management fncs. Would have to re-write things to stop that.
> 
> i915_parse_cmds()
>   copy_batch()
>     i915_gem_obj_prepare_shmem_read()
>       i915_gem_object_get_pages()
> 
> After removing the fancy retry loop suggested by Daniel and moving to a
> single cache list, the implementation looks very simple imo. And,
> setting 'obj->madv = I915_MADV_WILLNEED;' looks right. Readability wise,
> you don't have to investigate further to understand the justification
> for that statement. Here is an RFC snippet...
> 
> i915_gem_batch_pool_get(struct i915_gem_batch_pool *pool,    
>                         size_t size)
> {  
>         struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = NULL;
>         struct drm_i915_gem_object *tmp, *next;
>    
>         WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(&pool->dev->struct_mutex));
>    
>         list_for_each_entry_safe(tmp, next,
>                         &pool->cache_list, batch_pool_list) {
>    
>                 if (tmp->active)
>                         continue;
>           
>                 if (tmp->madv == __I915_MADV_PURGED) {                      
>                         list_del(&tmp->batch_pool_list);                    
>                         drm_gem_object_unreference(&tmp->base);             
>                         continue;
>                 }
>    
>                 if (tmp->base.size >= size &&
>                     tmp->base.size <= (2 * size)) {
>                         obj = tmp;
>                         break;
>                 }
>         }
> 
>         if (!obj) {
>                 obj = i915_gem_alloc_object(pool->dev, size);
>                 if (!obj)
>                         return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> 
>                 list_add_tail(&obj->batch_pool_list, &pool->cache_list);
>         }
> 
>         obj->madv = I915_MADV_WILLNEED;
> 
>         return obj;
> }
> 
> Given the spirit of your feedback was to simplify pool_get(), does this
> RFC do it for you? If not, I kindly request we have a sync up meeting to
> discuss your 'obj->madv = DONTNEED' suggestion.

Yeah I think this looks good. And setting DONTNEED should imo be done in
the _put function, which we do right away in execbuf (after having pushed
the shadow batch to the active list to make sure it doesn't disappear too
quickly). Maybe I'm misunderstanding what Chris means, but setting
DONTNEED right away in _get is too early and needs a lot more care in
users of the batch pool like you point out. It's also not how libdrm does
use the madv settings.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-03  9:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-11-26 21:53 [PATCH v5 0/7] Command parser batch buffer copy michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] drm/i915: Implement a framework for batch buffer pools michael.h.nguyen
2014-12-08 15:19   ` Bloomfield, Jon
2014-12-08 18:29     ` Michael H. Nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] drm/i915: Use batch pools with the command parser michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] drm/i915: Add a batch pool debugfs file michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] drm/i915: Add batch pool details to i915_gem_objects debugfs michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] drm/i915: Use batch length instead of object size in command parser michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] drm/i915: Mark shadow batch buffers as purgeable michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-26 21:53 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] drm/i915: Tidy up execbuffer command parsing code michael.h.nguyen
2014-11-27  7:44 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Command parser batch buffer copy Chris Wilson
2014-12-01 22:39   ` Michael H. Nguyen
2014-12-02  9:45     ` Daniel Vetter
2014-12-02 19:10       ` Michael H. Nguyen
2014-12-03  9:14         ` Daniel Vetter
2014-12-02 11:13     ` Chris Wilson
2014-12-02 12:57       ` Daniel Vetter
2014-12-02 21:57       ` Michael H. Nguyen
2014-12-03  9:17         ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2014-12-03  9:31           ` Chris Wilson
2014-12-03 14:12             ` 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=20141203091732.GY32117@phenom.ffwll.local \
    --to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=michael.h.nguyen@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox