From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Assert that the request is indeed complete when signaled from irq
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:25:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87e89751-cff8-9742-8efb-8f04ce90ec0d@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <152024889840.32001.13226815395700996173@mail.alporthouse.com>
On 05/03/2018 11:21, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-03-05 11:12:45)
>>
>> On 05/03/2018 10:41, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> After we call dma_fence_signal(), confirm that the request was indeed
>>> complete.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>> index ce16003ef048..633c18785c1e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
>>> @@ -1123,6 +1123,7 @@ static void notify_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
>>>
>>> if (rq) {
>>> dma_fence_signal(&rq->fence);
>>> + GEM_BUG_ON(!i915_request_completed(rq));
>>> i915_request_put(rq);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>
>> What's the motivation? There is a i915_seqno_passed check a few lines
>
> The seqno check is on wait.seqno, this is to confirm it all ties
> together with the request and our preemption avoidance is solid. The
> motivation was the bug in the signaler along the same lines.
>
>> above. So there would have to be a confusion in internal breadcrumbs
>> state for this to be possible. In which case I'd rather put the assert
>> in breadcrumbs code. For instance in intel_wait_check_request, asserting
>> that the seqno in wait matches the seqno in wait->request.
>
> The entire point of that check is to say when they don't match so that
> we know when the request was unsubmitted during the wait.
Ok my suggesting wasn't really appropriate. I just disliked a bit open
coding the assert. No smart and worthwhile suggestions to improve it.
i915_request_signal came to mind to wrap the assert and dma_fence_signal
but I dont see sufficient call sites.
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-05 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-05 10:41 [PATCH] drm/i915: Assert that the request is indeed complete when signaled from irq Chris Wilson
2018-03-05 11:12 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2018-03-05 11:21 ` Chris Wilson
2018-03-05 12:25 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2018-03-07 12:59 ` Chris Wilson
2018-03-05 12:08 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2018-03-05 15:18 ` ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
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=87e89751-cff8-9742-8efb-8f04ce90ec0d@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--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