Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: phasta@kernel.org, "Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"Gustavo Padovan" <gustavo@padovan.org>,
	"Felix Kuehling" <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>,
	"Alex Deucher" <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
	"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
	"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
	"Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	"Joonas Lahtinen" <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"Tvrtko Ursulin" <tursulin@ursulin.net>,
	"Huang Rui" <ray.huang@amd.com>,
	"Matthew Auld" <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
	"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
	"Lucas De Marchi" <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
	"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dma-buf/dma-fence: Add dma_fence_check_and_signal()
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 16:20:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <93a4f4e4-af7a-4c84-a7a2-5db785f2a5a8@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2a9c83b4a428bb3cc993499c39d0da01f9563278.camel@mailbox.org>

On 12/1/25 14:55, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-12-01 at 14:23 +0100, Christian König wrote:
>> On 12/1/25 11:50, Philipp Stanner wrote:
>>> The overwhelming majority of users of dma_fence signaling functions
>>> don't care about whether the fence had already been signaled by someone
>>> else. Therefore, the return code shall be removed from those functions.
>>>
>>> For the few users who rely on the check, a new, specialized function
>>> shall be provided.
>>>
>>> Add dma_fence_check_and_signal(), which signals a fence if it had not
>>> yet been signaled, and informs the user about that.
>>>
>>> Add a counter part, dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked(), which doesn't
>>> take the spinlock.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Philipp Stanner <phasta@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/linux/dma-fence.h   |  2 ++
>>>  2 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>>> index 96d72ffc0750..146de62887cf 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence.c
>>> @@ -445,6 +445,50 @@ int dma_fence_signal_locked(struct dma_fence *fence)
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_signal_locked);
>>>  
>>> +/**
>>> + * dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked - signal the fence if it's not yet signaled
>>> + * @fence: the fence to check and signal
>>> + *
>>> + * Checks whether a fence was signaled and signals it if it was not yet signaled.
>>> + *
>>> + * Unlike dma_fence_check_and_signal(), this function must be called with
>>> + * &struct dma_fence.lock being held.
>>> + *
>>> + * Return: true if fence has been signaled already, false otherwise.
>>> + */
>>> +bool dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked(struct dma_fence *fence)
>>
>> I'm seriously considering to nuke all the unlocked variants of dma_fence functions and just make it mandatory for callers to grab the lock manually.
>>
> 
> You mean "nuke the *locked* variants.

Sorry, that wasn't specific enough.

What I meant was making the locked variants the default instead of the unlocked ones.

> 
> Why, though? Aren't they enough for most users?
> I suppose you have all those subtle races in mind..

Yeah, exactly that.

> 
>>> +{
>>> +	bool ret;
>>> +
>>> +	ret = dma_fence_test_signaled_flag(fence);
>>> +	dma_fence_signal_locked(fence);
>>> +
>>> +	return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked);
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> + * dma_fence_check_and_signal - signal the fence if it's not yet signaled
>>> + * @fence: the fence to check and signal
>>> + *
>>> + * Checks whether a fence was signaled and signals it if it was not yet signaled.
>>> + * All this is done in a race-free manner.
>>> + *
>>> + * Return: true if fence has been signaled already, false otherwise.
>>> + */
>>> +bool dma_fence_check_and_signal(struct dma_fence *fence)
>>
>> So I think we should name this one here dma_fence_check_and_signal_unlocked() and drop the postfix from the locked variant.
> 
> postfix?
> 
> Well, now, IDK. Can't we, for this series, keep the _locked() variant
> so that it's congruent with all the other dma_fence code?

Good point. That thought was not really related to this series here.

> 
> And then later if you want to force manual locking you can add that
> kernel-wide in a separate series, since it'll be a discussion-worthy,
> bigger chunk of work.
> 
> That's cleaner, and my series here won't prevent that once merged.
> 
>>
>>> +{
>>> +	unsigned long flags;
>>> +	bool ret;
>>> +
>>> +	spin_lock_irqsave(fence->lock, flags);
>>> +	ret = dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked(fence);
>>> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(fence->lock, flags);
>>
>> Could this use guard(fence->lock, flags) ?
> 
> guard? You mean a lockdep guard? Do you have a pointer to someplace in
> dma_fence who does what you mean / want?

E.g. like guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&fence->lock);

Regards,
Christian.

> 
> 
> P.
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>> +
>>> +	return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_fence_check_and_signal);
>>> +
>>>  /**
>>>   * dma_fence_signal - signal completion of a fence
>>>   * @fence: the fence to signal
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/dma-fence.h b/include/linux/dma-fence.h
>>> index 19972f5d176f..0504afe52c2a 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/dma-fence.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/dma-fence.h
>>> @@ -365,6 +365,8 @@ static inline void __dma_fence_might_wait(void) {}
>>>  #endif
>>>  
>>>  int dma_fence_signal(struct dma_fence *fence);
>>> +bool dma_fence_check_and_signal(struct dma_fence *fence);
>>> +bool dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked(struct dma_fence *fence);
>>>  int dma_fence_signal_locked(struct dma_fence *fence);
>>>  int dma_fence_signal_timestamp(struct dma_fence *fence, ktime_t timestamp);
>>>  int dma_fence_signal_timestamp_locked(struct dma_fence *fence,
>>
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-01 15:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-01 10:50 [PATCH 0/6] dma-fence: Remove return code of dma_fence_signal() et al Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] dma-buf/dma-fence: Add dma_fence_test_signaled_flag() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:03   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] dma-buf/dma-fence: Add dma_fence_check_and_signal() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 13:23   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 13:55     ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 15:20       ` Christian König [this message]
2025-12-01 15:34         ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 16:06           ` Christian König
2025-12-01 15:53         ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 16:08           ` Christian König
2025-12-02  9:19             ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:05   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] amd/amdkfd: Use dma_fence_check_and_signal() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 15:21   ` Felix Kuehling
2025-12-03 13:10   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] drm/xe: Use dma_fence_check_and_signal_locked() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 19:38   ` Matthew Brost
2025-12-02  7:17     ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-02 15:57       ` Matthew Brost
2025-12-02 20:47     ` Andi Shyti
2025-12-02 21:04       ` Matthew Brost
2025-12-03 21:13         ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-12-03 13:14   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] dma-buf: Don't misuse dma_fence_signal() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:11   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] drm/ttm: Use dma_fence_check_and_signal() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:11   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] dma-buf/dma-fence: Remove return code of signaling-functions Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:13   ` Christian König
2025-12-01 10:50 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] drm/xe: Use dma_fence_test_signaled_flag() Philipp Stanner
2025-12-01 19:33   ` Matthew Brost
2025-12-02  8:29     ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 13:15   ` Christian König
2025-12-03 15:18     ` Philipp Stanner
2025-12-03 15:24       ` Christian König
2025-12-03 17:31         ` Matthew Brost
2025-12-03 21:12           ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-12-04 14:10 ` [PATCH 0/6] dma-fence: Remove return code of dma_fence_signal() et al Philipp Stanner

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=93a4f4e4-af7a-4c84-a7a2-5db785f2a5a8@amd.com \
    --to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=Felix.Kuehling@amd.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
    --cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=gustavo@padovan.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
    --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=mripard@kernel.org \
    --cc=phasta@kernel.org \
    --cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=tursulin@ursulin.net \
    --cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
    /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