From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/23] drm/i915: Parse command buffer earlier in eb_relocate(slow)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 14:49:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <77d31489-33f1-c025-aa3c-bfe3d70a0e54@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200703122221.591656-7-maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
On 03/07/2020 13:22, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
> We want to introduce backoff logic, but we need to lock the
> pool object as well for command parsing. Because of this, we
> will need backoff logic for the engine pool obj, move the batch
> validation up slightly to eb_lookup_vmas, and the actual command
> parsing in a separate function which can get called from execbuf
> relocation fast and slowpath.
On this one I also had some feedback in the previous round which you
maybe missed.
Regards,
Tvrtko
> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 68 ++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index c2a4e499233b..64b75f71a6bb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -290,6 +290,8 @@ struct i915_execbuffer {
> struct eb_vma_array *array;
> };
>
> +static int eb_parse(struct i915_execbuffer *eb);
> +
> static inline bool eb_use_cmdparser(const struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> return intel_engine_requires_cmd_parser(eb->engine) ||
> @@ -866,6 +868,7 @@ static struct i915_vma *eb_lookup_vma(struct i915_execbuffer *eb, u32 handle)
>
> static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = eb->i915;
> unsigned int batch = eb_batch_index(eb);
> unsigned int i;
> int err = 0;
> @@ -879,18 +882,37 @@ static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> vma = eb_lookup_vma(eb, eb->exec[i].handle);
> if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
> err = PTR_ERR(vma);
> - break;
> + goto err;
> }
>
> err = eb_validate_vma(eb, &eb->exec[i], vma);
> if (unlikely(err)) {
> i915_vma_put(vma);
> - break;
> + goto err;
> }
>
> eb_add_vma(eb, i, batch, vma);
> }
>
> + if (unlikely(eb->batch->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE)) {
> + drm_dbg(&i915->drm,
> + "Attempting to use self-modifying batch buffer\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (range_overflows_t(u64,
> + eb->batch_start_offset, eb->batch_len,
> + eb->batch->vma->size)) {
> + drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Attempting to use out-of-bounds batch\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (eb->batch_len == 0)
> + eb->batch_len = eb->batch->vma->size - eb->batch_start_offset;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err:
> eb->vma[i].vma = NULL;
> return err;
> }
> @@ -1802,7 +1824,7 @@ static int eb_prefault_relocations(const struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static noinline int eb_relocate_slow(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +static noinline int eb_relocate_parse_slow(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> bool have_copy = false;
> struct eb_vma *ev;
> @@ -1868,6 +1890,11 @@ static noinline int eb_relocate_slow(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> if (err)
> goto err;
>
> + /* as last step, parse the command buffer */
> + err = eb_parse(eb);
> + if (err)
> + goto err;
> +
> /*
> * Leave the user relocations as are, this is the painfully slow path,
> * and we want to avoid the complication of dropping the lock whilst
> @@ -1900,7 +1927,7 @@ static noinline int eb_relocate_slow(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> return err;
> }
>
> -static int eb_relocate(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +static int eb_relocate_parse(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> int err;
>
> @@ -1925,10 +1952,10 @@ static int eb_relocate(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> }
>
> if (err)
> - return eb_relocate_slow(eb);
> + return eb_relocate_parse_slow(eb);
> }
>
> - return 0;
> + return eb_parse(eb);
> }
>
> static int eb_move_to_gpu(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> @@ -2866,7 +2893,7 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device *dev,
> if (unlikely(err))
> goto err_context;
>
> - err = eb_relocate(&eb);
> + err = eb_relocate_parse(&eb);
> if (err) {
> /*
> * If the user expects the execobject.offset and
> @@ -2879,33 +2906,10 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device *dev,
> goto err_vma;
> }
>
> - if (unlikely(eb.batch->flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE)) {
> - drm_dbg(&i915->drm,
> - "Attempting to use self-modifying batch buffer\n");
> - err = -EINVAL;
> - goto err_vma;
> - }
> -
> - if (range_overflows_t(u64,
> - eb.batch_start_offset, eb.batch_len,
> - eb.batch->vma->size)) {
> - drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Attempting to use out-of-bounds batch\n");
> - err = -EINVAL;
> - goto err_vma;
> - }
> -
> - if (eb.batch_len == 0)
> - eb.batch_len = eb.batch->vma->size - eb.batch_start_offset;
> -
> - err = eb_parse(&eb);
> - if (err)
> - goto err_vma;
> -
> /*
> * snb/ivb/vlv conflate the "batch in ppgtt" bit with the "non-secure
> * batch" bit. Hence we need to pin secure batches into the global gtt.
> * hsw should have this fixed, but bdw mucks it up again. */
> - batch = eb.batch->vma;
> if (eb.batch_flags & I915_DISPATCH_SECURE) {
> struct i915_vma *vma;
>
> @@ -2919,13 +2923,15 @@ i915_gem_do_execbuffer(struct drm_device *dev,
> * fitting due to fragmentation.
> * So this is actually safe.
> */
> - vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(batch->obj, NULL, 0, 0, 0);
> + vma = i915_gem_object_ggtt_pin(eb.batch->vma->obj, NULL, 0, 0, 0);
> if (IS_ERR(vma)) {
> err = PTR_ERR(vma);
> goto err_parse;
> }
>
> batch = vma;
> + } else {
> + batch = eb.batch->vma;
> }
>
> /* All GPU relocation batches must be submitted prior to the user rq */
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-03 13:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-03 12:21 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 00/23] drm/i915: Use ww locking in execbuf submission Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:21 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/23] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 02/23] drm/i915: Revert relocation chaining commits Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 03/23] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Drop relocation slowpath" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 04/23] drm/i915: Add an implementation for i915_gem_ww_ctx locking, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 13:45 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 05/23] drm/i915: Remove locking from i915_gem_object_prepare_read/write Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 13:43 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-06 12:53 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/23] drm/i915: Parse command buffer earlier in eb_relocate(slow) Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 13:49 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2020-07-06 12:53 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-06 15:47 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/23] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Split eb_vma into its own allocation" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 08/23] drm/i915: Use per object locking in execbuf, v12 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 09/23] drm/i915: Use ww locking in intel_renderstate Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 10/23] drm/i915: Add ww context handling to context_barrier_task Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 11/23] drm/i915: Nuke arguments to eb_pin_engine Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 13:38 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 12/23] drm/i915: Pin engine before pinning all objects, v4 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 13/23] drm/i915: Rework intel_context pinning to do everything outside of pin_mutex Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 14/23] drm/i915: Make sure execbuffer always passes ww state to i915_vma_pin Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 15/23] drm/i915: Convert i915_gem_object/client_blt.c to use ww locking as well, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 16/23] drm/i915: Kill last user of intel_context_create_request outside of selftests Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 17/23] drm/i915: Convert i915_perf to ww locking as well Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 18/23] drm/i915: Dirty hack to fix selftests locking inversion Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 13:48 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-07 10:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-07 10:56 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-07-07 11:00 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 19/23] drm/i915/selftests: Fix locking inversion in lrc selftest Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 20/23] drm/i915: Use ww pinning for intel_context_create_request() Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 21/23] drm/i915: Move i915_vma_lock in the selftests to avoid lock inversion, v2 Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 22/23] drm/i915: Add ww locking to vm_fault_gtt Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 12:22 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 23/23] drm/i915: Add ww locking to pin_to_display_plane Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-03 14:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Use ww locking in execbuf submission Patchwork
2020-07-03 14:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2020-07-03 14:36 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-07-14 11:44 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/23] Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" Maarten Lankhorst
2020-07-14 11:44 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 06/23] drm/i915: Parse command buffer earlier in eb_relocate(slow) Maarten Lankhorst
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=77d31489-33f1-c025-aa3c-bfe3d70a0e54@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.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