public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Belgaumkar, Vinay" <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>,
	carl.zhang@intel.com, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gem: Allow users to disable waitboost
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:34:32 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <915a5e08-5daf-153d-cb82-b0f9e5bd3b2a@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f7f3950-bc9b-06cf-611c-46c360bb90e9@linux.intel.com>


On 9/21/2023 3:41 AM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 20/09/2023 22:56, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>> Provide a bit to disable waitboost while waiting on a gem object.
>> Waitboost results in increased power consumption by requesting RP0
>> while waiting for the request to complete. Add a bit in the gem_wait()
>> IOCTL where this can be disabled.
>>
>> This is related to the libva API change here -
>> Link: 
>> https://github.com/XinfengZhang/libva/commit/3d90d18c67609a73121bb71b20ee4776b54b61a7
>
> This link does not appear to lead to userspace code using this uapi?
We have asked Carl (cc'd) to post a patch for the same.
>
>>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_wait.c | 9 ++++++---
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c      | 3 ++-
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h      | 1 +
>>   include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h              | 1 +
>>   4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_wait.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_wait.c
>> index d4b918fb11ce..955885ec859d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_wait.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_wait.c
>> @@ -72,7 +72,8 @@ i915_gem_object_wait_reservation(struct dma_resv 
>> *resv,
>>       struct dma_fence *fence;
>>       long ret = timeout ?: 1;
>>   -    i915_gem_object_boost(resv, flags);
>> +    if (!(flags & I915_WAITBOOST_DISABLE))
>> +        i915_gem_object_boost(resv, flags);
>>         dma_resv_iter_begin(&cursor, resv,
>>                   dma_resv_usage_rw(flags & I915_WAIT_ALL));
>> @@ -236,7 +237,7 @@ i915_gem_wait_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void 
>> *data, struct drm_file *file)
>>       ktime_t start;
>>       long ret;
>>   -    if (args->flags != 0)
>> +    if (args->flags != 0 || args->flags != I915_GEM_WAITBOOST_DISABLE)
>>           return -EINVAL;
>>         obj = i915_gem_object_lookup(file, args->bo_handle);
>> @@ -248,7 +249,9 @@ i915_gem_wait_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void 
>> *data, struct drm_file *file)
>>       ret = i915_gem_object_wait(obj,
>>                      I915_WAIT_INTERRUPTIBLE |
>>                      I915_WAIT_PRIORITY |
>> -                   I915_WAIT_ALL,
>> +                   I915_WAIT_ALL |
>> +                   (args->flags & I915_GEM_WAITBOOST_DISABLE ?
>> +                    I915_WAITBOOST_DISABLE : 0),
>>                      to_wait_timeout(args->timeout_ns));
>>         if (args->timeout_ns > 0) {
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
>> index f59081066a19..2957409b4b2a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
>> @@ -2044,7 +2044,8 @@ long i915_request_wait_timeout(struct 
>> i915_request *rq,
>>        * but at a cost of spending more power processing the workload
>>        * (bad for battery).
>>        */
>> -    if (flags & I915_WAIT_PRIORITY && !i915_request_started(rq))
>> +    if (!(flags & I915_WAITBOOST_DISABLE) && (flags & 
>> I915_WAIT_PRIORITY) &&
>> +        !i915_request_started(rq))
>>           intel_rps_boost(rq);
>>         wait.tsk = current;
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h
>> index 0ac55b2e4223..3cc00e8254dc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.h
>> @@ -445,6 +445,7 @@ long i915_request_wait(struct i915_request *rq,
>>   #define I915_WAIT_INTERRUPTIBLE    BIT(0)
>>   #define I915_WAIT_PRIORITY    BIT(1) /* small priority bump for the 
>> request */
>>   #define I915_WAIT_ALL        BIT(2) /* used by 
>> i915_gem_object_wait() */
>> +#define I915_WAITBOOST_DISABLE    BIT(3) /* used by 
>> i915_gem_object_wait() */
>>     void i915_request_show(struct drm_printer *m,
>>                  const struct i915_request *rq,
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> index 7000e5910a1d..4adee70e39cf 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> @@ -1928,6 +1928,7 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_wait {
>>       /** Handle of BO we shall wait on */
>>       __u32 bo_handle;
>>       __u32 flags;
>> +#define I915_GEM_WAITBOOST_DISABLE      (1u<<0)
>
> Probably would be good to avoid mentioning waitboost in the uapi since 
> so far it wasn't an explicit feature/contract. Something like 
> I915_GEM_WAIT_BACKGROUND_PRIORITY? Low priority?
sure.
>
> I also wonder if there could be a possible angle to help Rob (+cc) 
> upstream the syncobj/fence deadline code if our media driver might 
> make use of that somehow.
>
> Like if either we could wire up the deadline into GEM_WAIT (in a 
> backward compatible manner), or if media could use sync fd wait 
> instead. Assuming they have an out fence already, which may not be true.

Makes sense. We could add a SET_DEADLINE flag or something similar and 
pass in the deadline when appropriate.

Thanks,

Vinay.

>
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
>>       /** Number of nanoseconds to wait, Returns time remaining. */
>>       __s64 timeout_ns;
>>   };

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-27 19:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-20 21:56 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/gem: Allow users to disable waitboost Vinay Belgaumkar
2023-09-21  3:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2023-09-21  3:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2023-09-21  4:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2023-09-21 10:41 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2023-09-27 19:34   ` Belgaumkar, Vinay [this message]
2023-09-28 12:48     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2023-10-13 20:51       ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-10-16  8:02         ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2023-10-16 17:58           ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-09-26  2:58 ` kernel test robot
2023-10-27  5:30 ` kernel test robot

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=915a5e08-5daf-153d-cb82-b0f9e5bd3b2a@intel.com \
    --to=vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com \
    --cc=carl.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=robdclark@chromium.org \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@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