From: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Subject: [Intel-xe] [PATCH v2 1/3] Revert "drm/xe: Use atomic instead of mutex for xe_device_mem_access_ongoing"
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 19:03:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230505180349.367572-1-matthew.auld@intel.com> (raw)
This reverts commit c3712d924f6b5022498f4357009943c326389f9c.
We add a similar version back, once we fix the locking inside
xe_device_mem_access.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h | 18 ++++++++++++------
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h | 4 +++-
3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
index 45d6e5ff47fd..01c497bcf9a5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
@@ -217,6 +217,8 @@ struct xe_device *xe_device_create(struct pci_dev *pdev,
if (err)
goto err_put;
+ drmm_mutex_init(&xe->drm, &xe->mem_access.lock);
+
return xe;
err_put:
@@ -405,25 +407,25 @@ u32 xe_device_ccs_bytes(struct xe_device *xe, u64 size)
void xe_device_mem_access_get(struct xe_device *xe)
{
bool resumed = xe_pm_runtime_resume_if_suspended(xe);
- int ref = atomic_inc_return(&xe->mem_access.ref);
- if (ref == 1)
+ mutex_lock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
+ if (xe->mem_access.ref++ == 0)
xe->mem_access.hold_rpm = xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active(xe);
+ mutex_unlock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
/* The usage counter increased if device was immediately resumed */
if (resumed)
xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
- XE_WARN_ON(ref == S32_MAX);
+ XE_WARN_ON(xe->mem_access.ref == S32_MAX);
}
void xe_device_mem_access_put(struct xe_device *xe)
{
- bool hold = xe->mem_access.hold_rpm;
- int ref = atomic_dec_return(&xe->mem_access.ref);
-
- if (!ref && hold)
+ mutex_lock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
+ if (--xe->mem_access.ref == 0 && xe->mem_access.hold_rpm)
xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
+ mutex_unlock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
- XE_WARN_ON(ref < 0);
+ XE_WARN_ON(xe->mem_access.ref < 0);
}
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
index cbae480a2092..9ab7e6134f89 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.h
@@ -90,14 +90,20 @@ static inline struct xe_force_wake * gt_to_fw(struct xe_gt *gt)
void xe_device_mem_access_get(struct xe_device *xe);
void xe_device_mem_access_put(struct xe_device *xe);
-static inline bool xe_device_mem_access_ongoing(struct xe_device *xe)
-{
- return atomic_read(&xe->mem_access.ref);
-}
-
static inline void xe_device_assert_mem_access(struct xe_device *xe)
{
- XE_WARN_ON(!xe_device_mem_access_ongoing(xe));
+ XE_WARN_ON(!xe->mem_access.ref);
+}
+
+static inline bool xe_device_mem_access_ongoing(struct xe_device *xe)
+{
+ bool ret;
+
+ mutex_lock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
+ ret = xe->mem_access.ref;
+ mutex_unlock(&xe->mem_access.lock);
+
+ return ret;
}
static inline bool xe_device_in_fault_mode(struct xe_device *xe)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h
index 3a11caaf874b..59462933f67a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h
@@ -256,8 +256,10 @@ struct xe_device {
* triggering additional actions when they occur.
*/
struct {
+ /** @lock: protect the ref count */
+ struct mutex lock;
/** @ref: ref count of memory accesses */
- atomic_t ref;
+ s32 ref;
/** @hold_rpm: need to put rpm ref back at the end */
bool hold_rpm;
} mem_access;
--
2.40.0
next reply other threads:[~2023-05-05 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-05 18:03 Matthew Auld [this message]
2023-05-05 18:03 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v2 2/3] drm/xe: fix xe_device_mem_access_get() race Matthew Auld
2023-05-05 18:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2023-05-05 19:04 ` Matthew Auld
2023-05-05 18:03 ` [Intel-xe] [PATCH v2 3/3] drm/xe: Use atomic for mem_access.ref Matthew Auld
2023-05-05 18:06 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for series starting with [v2,1/3] Revert "drm/xe: Use atomic instead of mutex for xe_device_mem_access_ongoing" Patchwork
2023-05-05 18:07 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2023-05-05 18:11 ` [Intel-xe] ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2023-05-05 18:30 ` [Intel-xe] ○ CI.BAT: info " 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=20230505180349.367572-1-matthew.auld@intel.com \
--to=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@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