intel-xe.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Ilia Levi <ilia.levi@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <piotr.piorkowski@intel.com>,
	<koby.elbaz@intel.com>, <yaron.avizrat@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Make irq enabled flag atomic
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:13:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z1nWXdfn_azp1KLK@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241210173506.202150-1-ilia.levi@intel.com>

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 07:35:06PM +0200, Ilia Levi wrote:
> The irq.enabled flag was protected by a spin lock (irq.lock).
> By making it atomic we no longer need to wait for the spin lock in
> irq handlers. This will become especially useful for MSI-X irq
> handlers to prevent lock contention between different interrupts.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ilia Levi <ilia.levi@intel.com>

Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>

pushing soon to drm-xe-next. Thanks for the patch

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/ext/i915_irq.c | 13 +---------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h      |  2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_irq.c               | 29 ++++++-----------------
>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/ext/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/ext/i915_irq.c
> index a7dbc6554d69..ac4cda2d81c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/ext/i915_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/display/ext/i915_irq.c
> @@ -53,18 +53,7 @@ void gen2_irq_init(struct intel_uncore *uncore, struct i915_irq_regs regs,
>  
>  bool intel_irqs_enabled(struct xe_device *xe)
>  {
> -	/*
> -	 * XXX: i915 has a racy handling of the irq.enabled, since it doesn't
> -	 * lock its transitions. Because of that, the irq.enabled sometimes
> -	 * is not read with the irq.lock in place.
> -	 * However, the most critical cases like vblank and page flips are
> -	 * properly using the locks.
> -	 * We cannot take the lock in here or run any kind of assert because
> -	 * of i915 inconsistency.
> -	 * But at this point the xe irq is better protected against races,
> -	 * although the full solution would be protecting the i915 side.
> -	 */
> -	return xe->irq.enabled;
> +	return atomic_read(&xe->irq.enabled);
>  }
>  
>  void intel_synchronize_irq(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 1373a222f5a5..ace22e35e769 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h
> @@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ struct xe_device {
>  		spinlock_t lock;
>  
>  		/** @irq.enabled: interrupts enabled on this device */
> -		bool enabled;
> +		atomic_t enabled;
>  	} irq;
>  
>  	/** @ttm: ttm device */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_irq.c
> index 7bf7201529ac..1c509e66694d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_irq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_irq.c
> @@ -348,12 +348,8 @@ static irqreturn_t xelp_irq_handler(int irq, void *arg)
>  	unsigned long intr_dw[2];
>  	u32 identity[32];
>  
> -	spin_lock(&xe->irq.lock);
> -	if (!xe->irq.enabled) {
> -		spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
> +	if (!atomic_read(&xe->irq.enabled))
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
> -	}
> -	spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
>  
>  	master_ctl = xelp_intr_disable(xe);
>  	if (!master_ctl) {
> @@ -417,12 +413,8 @@ static irqreturn_t dg1_irq_handler(int irq, void *arg)
>  
>  	/* TODO: This really shouldn't be copied+pasted */
>  
> -	spin_lock(&xe->irq.lock);
> -	if (!xe->irq.enabled) {
> -		spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
> +	if (!atomic_read(&xe->irq.enabled))
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
> -	}
> -	spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
>  
>  	master_tile_ctl = dg1_intr_disable(xe);
>  	if (!master_tile_ctl) {
> @@ -644,12 +636,8 @@ static irqreturn_t vf_mem_irq_handler(int irq, void *arg)
>  	struct xe_tile *tile;
>  	unsigned int id;
>  
> -	spin_lock(&xe->irq.lock);
> -	if (!xe->irq.enabled) {
> -		spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
> +	if (!atomic_read(&xe->irq.enabled))
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
> -	}
> -	spin_unlock(&xe->irq.lock);
>  
>  	for_each_tile(tile, xe, id)
>  		xe_memirq_handler(&tile->memirq);
> @@ -674,10 +662,9 @@ static void irq_uninstall(void *arg)
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev);
>  	int irq;
>  
> -	if (!xe->irq.enabled)
> +	if (!atomic_xchg(&xe->irq.enabled, 0))
>  		return;
>  
> -	xe->irq.enabled = false;
>  	xe_irq_reset(xe);
>  
>  	irq = pci_irq_vector(pdev, 0);
> @@ -724,7 +711,7 @@ int xe_irq_install(struct xe_device *xe)
>  		return err;
>  	}
>  
> -	xe->irq.enabled = true;
> +	atomic_set(&xe->irq.enabled, 1);
>  
>  	xe_irq_postinstall(xe);
>  
> @@ -744,9 +731,7 @@ void xe_irq_suspend(struct xe_device *xe)
>  {
>  	int irq = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev)->irq;
>  
> -	spin_lock_irq(&xe->irq.lock);
> -	xe->irq.enabled = false; /* no new irqs */
> -	spin_unlock_irq(&xe->irq.lock);
> +	atomic_set(&xe->irq.enabled, 0); /* no new irqs */
>  
>  	synchronize_irq(irq); /* flush irqs */
>  	xe_irq_reset(xe); /* turn irqs off */
> @@ -762,7 +747,7 @@ void xe_irq_resume(struct xe_device *xe)
>  	 * 1. no irq will arrive before the postinstall
>  	 * 2. display is not yet resumed
>  	 */
> -	xe->irq.enabled = true;
> +	atomic_set(&xe->irq.enabled, 1);
>  	xe_irq_reset(xe);
>  	xe_irq_postinstall(xe); /* turn irqs on */
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.2
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-12-11 18:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-10 17:35 [PATCH] drm/xe: Make irq enabled flag atomic Ilia Levi
2024-12-10 21:28 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for " Patchwork
2024-12-10 21:29 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-12-10 21:30 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-12-10 21:48 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-12-10 21:50 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-12-10 21:52 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-12-10 22:28 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-12-11  1:04 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2024-12-11 18:13 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2024-12-11 19:58   ` [PATCH] " Lucas De Marchi
2024-12-11 23:29     ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-12-12 12:45       ` Levi, Ilia
2024-12-12 14:36         ` Lucas De Marchi

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=Z1nWXdfn_azp1KLK@intel.com \
    --to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=ilia.levi@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=koby.elbaz@intel.com \
    --cc=piotr.piorkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=yaron.avizrat@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).