From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, lucas.demarchi@intel.com,
francois.dugast@intel.com, matthew.auld@intel.com,
anshuman.gupta@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] drm/xe: Relax runtime pm protection around VM
Date: Tue, 7 May 2024 18:19:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZjpwpXQ5VCk2KC68@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZjjnxOqHMXT9Ybw6@intel.com>
On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 10:23:00AM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 02:30:03PM +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote:
Thomas / Rodrigo, replying to both you to keep a continous thread.
> > Hi, Rodrigo.
> >
> > On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 15:13 -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > > In the regular use case scenario, user space will create a
> > > VM, and keep it alive for the entire duration of its workload.
> > >
> > > For the regular desktop cases, it means that the VM
> > > is alive even on idle scenarios where display goes off. This
> > > is unacceptable since this would entirely block runtime PM
> > > indefinitely, blocking deeper Package-C state. This would be
> > > a waste drainage of power.
> > >
> > > So, let's limit the protection only for the long running workloads,
> > > which memory might be mapped and accessed during this entire
> > > workload.
> > >
> > > This indeed opens up a risk of use case without display, and
> > > without long-running workload, where memory might be mapped
> > > and accessed with direct read and write operations without
> > > any gpu execution involved. Because of this, we are also
> > > adding here, the extra protection for the special vm_op access
> > > callback.
> >
> > A couple of ignorant questions:
> >
> > Why aren't the runtime_pm get / put in xe_sched_job_create() /
> > destroy() sufficient also for LR vms? If not, could the vm deactivation
> > / reactivation be used for this (see xe_vm_reactivate_rebind)
LR jobs become immediately free once they hit the hardware, i.e.,
run_job returns NULL so the scheduler can drop all references and we
don't accidentally export a DMA fence that will not signal for a long
time.
Sima and I landed on this design after a lengthy discussion [1].
So as soon as an LR job is put on the hardware, we will drop the job
runtime PM reference. With that, the part of the patch for holding
runtime PM on LR VMs looks correct to me.
With that, for the LR PM changes (haven't look at xe_vm_access change):
Acked-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/530656/?series=116054&rev=1
>
> Yes, in general we should be already protected by the sched or in
> the compute exported cases by the dma_buf...
>
> But I was afraid to end up in some corner cases of non-display
> compute scenarios where mapped memory would be accessed without
> any protection.
>
> Then it was also a request from Matt in some old reviews.
>
> Matt, thoughts?
>
> >
> > >
> > > In the ideal case of the mmapped scenario of vm_ops, we would
> > > also get references in the 'open' and 'mmap' callbacks, and
> > > put it back on the 'close' callback, for a balanced case.
> > > However, this would also block the regular desktop case, so
> > > we are not doing this.
> >
> > I'm not completely following here. We have xe_runtime_pm_get() in the
> > fault handler + some form of delayed xe_runtime_pm_put(). Does this say
> > we ideally should replace that with open + mmap / close?
>
> Exactly! Ideally yes, but we cannot do this or this entirely kill the
> PC10 and D3Cold in regular desktop case. Because compositors keep all
> the mmaped buffers alive even when display goes off in idle scenarios.
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thomas
> >
> > >
> > > Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> > > Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 6 +++---
> > > 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> > > index 52a16cb4e736..48eca9f2651a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c
> > > @@ -1157,11 +1157,26 @@ static vm_fault_t xe_gem_fault(struct
> > > vm_fault *vmf)
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static int xe_vm_access(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long
> > > addr,
> > > + void *buf, int len, int write)
> > > +{
> > > + struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo = vma->vm_private_data;
> > > + struct drm_device *ddev = tbo->base.dev;
> > > + struct xe_device *xe = to_xe_device(ddev);
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + xe_pm_runtime_get(xe);
> > > + ret = ttm_bo_vm_access(vma, addr, buf, len, write);
> > > + xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static const struct vm_operations_struct xe_gem_vm_ops = {
> > > .fault = xe_gem_fault,
> > > .open = ttm_bo_vm_open,
> > > .close = ttm_bo_vm_close,
> > > - .access = ttm_bo_vm_access
> > > + .access = xe_vm_access
> > > };
> > >
> > > static const struct drm_gem_object_funcs xe_gem_object_funcs = {
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > > index dfd31b346021..aa298b768620 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > > @@ -1347,7 +1347,7 @@ struct xe_vm *xe_vm_create(struct xe_device
> > > *xe, u32 flags)
> > >
> > > vm->pt_ops = &xelp_pt_ops;
> > >
> > > - if (!(flags & XE_VM_FLAG_MIGRATION))
> > > + if (flags & XE_VM_FLAG_LR_MODE)
> > > xe_pm_runtime_get_noresume(xe);
> > >
> > > vm_resv_obj = drm_gpuvm_resv_object_alloc(&xe->drm);
> > > @@ -1457,7 +1457,7 @@ struct xe_vm *xe_vm_create(struct xe_device
> > > *xe, u32 flags)
> > > for_each_tile(tile, xe, id)
> > > xe_range_fence_tree_fini(&vm->rftree[id]);
> > > kfree(vm);
> > > - if (!(flags & XE_VM_FLAG_MIGRATION))
> > > + if (flags & XE_VM_FLAG_LR_MODE)
> > > xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
> > > return ERR_PTR(err);
> > > }
> > > @@ -1592,7 +1592,7 @@ static void vm_destroy_work_func(struct
> > > work_struct *w)
> > >
> > > mutex_destroy(&vm->snap_mutex);
> > >
> > > - if (!(vm->flags & XE_VM_FLAG_MIGRATION))
> > > + if (vm->flags & XE_VM_FLAG_LR_MODE)
> > > xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
> > >
> > > for_each_tile(tile, xe, id)
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-07 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-03 19:13 [PATCH 0/7] Unlock deeper package-C states (PC-10) and D3Cold Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 1/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active return Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-06 11:47 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-06 13:15 ` Francois Dugast
2024-05-06 13:23 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 2/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_pm_runtime_get_if_in_use documentation Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-06 11:49 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 3/7] drm/xe: Relax runtime pm protection during execution Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-06 11:57 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 4/7] drm/xe: Relax runtime pm protection around VM Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-06 12:30 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-06 14:23 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-07 18:19 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2024-05-09 11:48 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-05-09 19:41 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 5/7] drm/xe: Prepare display for D3Cold Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 6/7] drm/xe: Stop checking for power_lost on D3Cold Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-07 10:35 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-05-03 19:13 ` [PATCH 7/7] drm/xe: Enable D3Cold on 'low' VRAM utilization Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-09 11:51 ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-05-03 20:34 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Unlock deeper package-C states (PC-10) and D3Cold Patchwork
2024-05-03 20:34 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-05-03 20:35 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-05-03 20:47 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-05-03 20:49 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-05-03 20:51 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-05-03 21:31 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-05-04 0:18 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-05-06 19:09 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-09 10:21 ` [PATCH 0/7] " Francois Dugast
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-05-08 20:07 [PATCH 1/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active return Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-08 20:07 ` [PATCH 4/7] drm/xe: Relax runtime pm protection around VM Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-09 15:48 ` Matthew Brost
2024-05-13 13:16 ` Thomas Hellström
2024-05-09 19:16 [PATCH 1/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_pm_runtime_get_if_active return Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-09 19:16 ` [PATCH 4/7] drm/xe: Relax runtime pm protection around VM Rodrigo Vivi
2024-05-09 19:28 ` Matthew Brost
2024-05-13 13:23 ` Thomas Hellström
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=ZjpwpXQ5VCk2KC68@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=francois.dugast@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@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