From: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
To: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>,
Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4] drm/xe/ufence: Signal ufence faster when possible
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 17:29:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241018152958.1975994-1-nirmoy.das@intel.com> (raw)
When the backing fence is already signaled, the ufence can be
immediately signaled without queuing in the ordered work queue.
This should also reduce load from the xe ordered_wq and won't
block signaling a ufence which doesn't require any serialization.
v2: fix system_wq typo
v3: signal immediately instead of queuing in system_wq (Matt B)
v4: revert back to v2 of using workqueue because of locking issue
and remote viewing a different mm struct.
Use Xe's unordered_wq which should be less congested than global
one.
Link: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/issues/1630
Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sync.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sync.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sync.c
index a90480c6aecf..7a1558c7ce09 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sync.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sync.c
@@ -92,18 +92,27 @@ static void user_fence_worker(struct work_struct *w)
user_fence_put(ufence);
}
-static void kick_ufence(struct xe_user_fence *ufence, struct dma_fence *fence)
+static void kick_ufence_ordered(struct xe_user_fence *ufence,
+ struct dma_fence *fence)
{
INIT_WORK(&ufence->worker, user_fence_worker);
queue_work(ufence->xe->ordered_wq, &ufence->worker);
dma_fence_put(fence);
}
+static void kick_ufence_unordered(struct xe_user_fence *ufence,
+ struct dma_fence *fence)
+{
+ INIT_WORK(&ufence->worker, user_fence_worker);
+ queue_work(ufence->xe->unordered_wq, &ufence->worker);
+ dma_fence_put(fence);
+}
+
static void user_fence_cb(struct dma_fence *fence, struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
{
struct xe_user_fence *ufence = container_of(cb, struct xe_user_fence, cb);
- kick_ufence(ufence, fence);
+ kick_ufence_ordered(ufence, fence);
}
int xe_sync_entry_parse(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_file *xef,
@@ -239,7 +248,16 @@ void xe_sync_entry_signal(struct xe_sync_entry *sync, struct dma_fence *fence)
err = dma_fence_add_callback(fence, &sync->ufence->cb,
user_fence_cb);
if (err == -ENOENT) {
- kick_ufence(sync->ufence, fence);
+ /*
+ * use unordered_wq to schedule it faster and to keep
+ * the ordered_wq less loaded as serialization is not
+ * needed for when the fence is already signaled.
+ *
+ * This needs to be done with a wq here to avoid locking
+ * issue when a ufence addr is backed by a bo and also
+ * tsk->mm needs to null to call kthread_use_mm().
+ */
+ kick_ufence_unordered(sync->ufence, fence);
} else if (err) {
XE_WARN_ON("failed to add user fence");
user_fence_put(sync->ufence);
--
2.46.0
next reply other threads:[~2024-10-18 16:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-18 15:29 Nirmoy Das [this message]
2024-10-18 16:16 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/ufence: Signal ufence faster when possible Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:17 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:18 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:29 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:32 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:35 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-10-18 16:58 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-10-19 6:56 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-10-22 16:06 ` [PATCH v4] " Cavitt, Jonathan
2024-11-07 11:23 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for drm/xe/ufence: Signal ufence faster when possible (rev2) Patchwork
2024-11-07 11:23 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-11-07 11:24 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-11-07 11:36 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-11-07 11:38 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-11-07 11:39 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-11-07 12:04 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-11-08 18:12 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-11-10 3:51 ` [PATCH v4] drm/xe/ufence: Signal ufence faster when possible Matthew Brost
2024-11-11 14:49 ` Nirmoy Das
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=20241018152958.1975994-1-nirmoy.das@intel.com \
--to=nirmoy.das@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@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