From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/19] drm/xe/svm : Add svm ranges migration policy on atomic access
Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 16:38:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aDjv2D4idRhGU0rS@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aDjtTXKvpuUdgSlT@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com>
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 04:27:09PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:09:56PM +0530, Himal Prasad Ghimiray wrote:
> > If the platform does not support atomic access on system memory, and the
> > ranges are in system memory, but the user requires atomic accesses on
> > the VMA, then migrate the ranges to VRAM. Apply this policy for prefetch
> > operations as well.
> >
> > v2
> > - Drop unnecessary vm_dbg
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c | 9 +++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_svm.c | 4 +++-
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.h | 2 ++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_madvise.c | 10 +++++++-
> > 5 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c
> > index 39bc1964089e..ad17ded0ecaa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c
> > @@ -645,13 +645,18 @@ static bool xe_atomic_for_vram(struct xe_vm *vm)
> > return true;
> > }
> >
> > -static bool xe_atomic_for_system(struct xe_vm *vm, struct xe_bo *bo)
> > +static bool xe_atomic_for_system(struct xe_vm *vm,
> > + struct xe_bo *bo,
> > + struct xe_vma *vma)
>
> You can get the BO from the VMA, so I'd drop the BO argument.
>
> > {
> > struct xe_device *xe = vm->xe;
> >
> > if (!xe->info.has_device_atomics_on_smem)
> > return false;
> >
> > + if (vma->attr.atomic_access == DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_DEVICE)
> > + return true;
> > +
> > /*
> > * If a SMEM+LMEM allocation is backed by SMEM, a device
> > * atomics will cause a gpu page fault and which then
> > @@ -745,7 +750,7 @@ xe_pt_stage_bind(struct xe_tile *tile, struct xe_vma *vma,
> >
> > if (vma->gpuva.flags & XE_VMA_ATOMIC_PTE_BIT) {
> > xe_walk.default_vram_pte = xe_atomic_for_vram(vm) ? XE_USM_PPGTT_PTE_AE : 0;
> > - xe_walk.default_system_pte = xe_atomic_for_system(vm, bo) ?
> > + xe_walk.default_system_pte = xe_atomic_for_system(vm, bo, vma) ?
> > XE_USM_PPGTT_PTE_AE : 0;
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_svm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_svm.c
> > index 5691bb9dbf26..743bb1f7d39c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_svm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_svm.c
> > @@ -771,6 +771,8 @@ bool xe_svm_range_needs_migrate_to_vram(struct xe_svm_range *range, struct xe_vm
> > struct xe_vm *vm = range_to_vm(&range->base);
> > u64 range_size = xe_svm_range_size(range);
> >
> > + preferred_region_is_vram |= xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic(vm->xe, vma);
> > +
>
> I'm not sure about this. Shouldn't we just set preferred_region_is_vram
> at the caller (prefered_vram || atomic fault) in the fault handler?
>
Let me fix this condition at the caller...
prefered_vram || (atomic fault && xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic)
Matt
> > if (!range->base.flags.migrate_devmem || !preferred_region_is_vram)
> > return false;
> >
> > @@ -812,7 +814,7 @@ int xe_svm_handle_pagefault(struct xe_vm *vm, struct xe_vma *vma,
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_XE_DEVMEM_MIRROR),
> > .check_pages_threshold = IS_DGFX(vm->xe) &&
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_XE_DEVMEM_MIRROR) ? SZ_64K : 0,
> > - .devmem_only = atomic && IS_DGFX(vm->xe) &&
> > + .devmem_only = atomic && xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic(vm->xe, vma) &&
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_XE_DEVMEM_MIRROR),
> > .timeslice_ms = atomic && IS_DGFX(vm->xe) &&
> > IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_XE_DEVMEM_MIRROR) ?
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > index 8208409485f6..e5fc2c2be8b2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c
> > @@ -2930,13 +2930,22 @@ static int prefetch_ranges(struct xe_vm *vm, struct xe_vma_op *op)
> > ctx.read_only = xe_vma_read_only(vma);
> > ctx.devmem_possible = devmem_possible;
> > ctx.check_pages_threshold = devmem_possible ? SZ_64K : 0;
> > + ctx.devmem_only = xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic(vm->xe, vma) &&
> > + IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_XE_DEVMEM_MIRROR);
>
> I still wouldn't set devmem only for prefetch as I don't think we should
> fail the prefetch unless we absolutely have too. A fault will still fix
> up atomic faults that are in system memory if needed.
>
> >
> > /* TODO: Threading the migration */
> > xa_for_each(&op->prefetch_range.range, i, svm_range) {
> > - if (!region)
> > + bool needs_vram = xe_svm_range_needs_migrate_to_vram(svm_range, vma, region);
> > +
> > + if (!needs_vram) {
> > xe_svm_range_migrate_to_smem(vm, svm_range);
> > + } else if (needs_vram) {
> > + /* If migration is mandated by atomic attributes
> > + * in vma and prefetch region is smem force prefetch
> > + * in vram of root tile.
> > + */
> > + region = region ? region : 1;
> >
>
> I don't this logic needs to change until we have preferred location is
> implemented. I don't think the atomic mode has any bearing on prefetch.
>
> > - if (xe_svm_range_needs_migrate_to_vram(svm_range, vma, region)) {
> > tile = &vm->xe->tiles[region_to_mem_type[region] - XE_PL_VRAM0];
> > err = xe_svm_alloc_vram(vm, tile, svm_range, &ctx);
> > if (err) {
> > @@ -4178,6 +4187,31 @@ void xe_vm_snapshot_free(struct xe_vm_snapshot *snap)
> > kvfree(snap);
> > }
> >
> > +/**
> > + * xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic - Check if VMA needs VRAM migration for atomic operations
> > + * @xe: Pointer to the XE device structure
> > + * @vma: Pointer to the virtual memory area (VMA) structure
> > + *
> > + * This function determines whether the given VMA needs to be migrated to
> > + * VRAM in order to do atomic GPU operation.
> > + *
> > + * Return: true if migration to VRAM is required, false otherwise.
> > + */
> > +bool xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_vma *vma)
> > +{
> > + /* Note: The checks implemented here are platform-specific. For instance,
> > + * on a device supporting CXL atomics, these would ideally work universally
> > + * without additional handling.
> > + */
> > + if (!IS_DGFX(xe) || vma->attr.atomic_access == DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_UNDEFINED ||
>
> I think DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_UNDEFINED is same as GLOBAL, right? Isn't that
> the default? Or global the default? We have been told whatever the
> default is, just has to work for SVM so maybe set to GLOBAL by default?
>
> > + vma->attr.atomic_access == DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_CPU ||
> > + (xe->info.has_device_atomics_on_smem &&
> > + vma->attr.atomic_access == DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_DEVICE))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + return true;
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * xe_vm_alloc_madvise_vma - Allocate VMA's with madvise ops
> > * @vm: Pointer to the xe_vm structure
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.h
> > index 8151b1b01a13..edd6ffd7c3ac 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.h
> > @@ -171,6 +171,8 @@ static inline bool xe_vma_is_userptr(struct xe_vma *vma)
> >
> > struct xe_vma *xe_vm_find_vma_by_addr(struct xe_vm *vm, u64 page_addr);
> >
> > +bool xe_vma_need_vram_migrate_for_atomic(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_vma *vma);
> > +
> > int xe_vm_alloc_madvise_vma(struct xe_vm *vm, uint64_t addr, uint64_t size);
> >
> > /**
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_madvise.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_madvise.c
> > index f7edefe5f6cf..084719660401 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_madvise.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_madvise.c
> > @@ -69,7 +69,15 @@ static int madvise_atomic(struct xe_device *xe, struct xe_vm *vm,
> > struct xe_vma **vmas, int num_vmas,
> > struct drm_xe_madvise_ops ops)
> > {
> > - /* Implementation pending */
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + xe_assert(vm->xe, ops.type == DRM_XE_VMA_ATTR_ATOMIC);
> > + xe_assert(vm->xe, ops.atomic.val > DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_UNDEFINED &&
>
> >= DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_UNDEFINED, right?
>
> Also santize this input before here as discussed in patch 19 and 10.
>
> Matt
>
> > + ops.atomic.val <= DRM_XE_VMA_ATOMIC_CPU);
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < num_vmas; i++)
> > + vmas[i]->attr.atomic_access = ops.atomic.val;
> > + /*TODO: handle bo backed vmas */
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-29 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-27 16:39 [PATCH v3 00/19] MADVISE FOR XE Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 01/19] Introduce drm_gpuvm_sm_map_ops_flags enums for sm_map_ops Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 02/19] drm/xe/uapi: Add madvise interface Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 16:27 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-28 17:03 ` Souza, Jose
2025-05-29 18:03 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 18:00 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-10 4:32 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 03/19] drm/xe/vm: Add attributes struct as member of vma Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 16:46 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 04/19] drm/xe/vma: Move pat_index to vma attributes Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 22:51 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 05/19] drm/xe/vma: Modify new_vma to accept struct xe_vma_mem_attr as parameter Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 22:58 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-02 6:19 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 06/19] drm/gpusvm: Make drm_gpusvm_for_each_* macros public Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 23:01 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 07/19] drm/xe/vm: Add a helper xe_vm_range_tilemask_tlb_invalidation() Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 23:12 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 3:21 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 08/19] drm/xe/svm: Add xe_svm_ranges_zap_ptes_in_range() for PTE zapping Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 23:15 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 3:06 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-29 4:00 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-30 6:29 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-10 4:31 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 09/19] drm/xe/svm: Split system allocator vma incase of madvise call Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-29 2:49 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 3:14 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-06-02 6:31 ` Dan Carpenter
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 10/19] drm/xe: Implement madvise ioctl for xe Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-29 22:43 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-30 6:36 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-30 21:34 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-10 4:52 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-06-10 5:13 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 11/19] drm/xe: Allow CPU address mirror VMA unbind with gpu bindings for madvise Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-29 22:54 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-12 9:02 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 12/19] drm/xe/svm : Add svm ranges migration policy on atomic access Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-29 23:27 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 23:38 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2025-05-30 4:40 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 13/19] drm/xe/madvise: Update migration policy based on preferred location Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-29 23:42 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 14/19] drm/xe/svm: Support DRM_XE_SVM_ATTR_PAT memory attribute Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-30 0:24 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:39 ` [PATCH v3 15/19] drm/xe/uapi: Add flag for consulting madvise hints on svm prefetch Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 16:29 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:40 ` [PATCH v3 16/19] drm/xe/svm: Consult madvise preferred location in prefetch Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-30 4:24 ` Matthew Brost
2025-06-24 18:56 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:40 ` [PATCH v3 17/19] drm/xe/uapi: Add UAPI for querying VMA count and memory attributes Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 17:02 ` Souza, Jose
2025-05-30 1:11 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-30 4:29 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 16:40 ` [PATCH v3 18/19] drm/xe/bo: Add attributes field to xe_bo Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 23:47 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 2:29 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-27 16:40 ` [PATCH v3 19/19] drm/xe/bo: Update atomic_access attribute on madvise Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2025-05-28 23:46 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 3:03 ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2025-05-29 18:24 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-29 18:30 ` Matthew Brost
2025-05-27 21:35 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for MADVISE FOR XE Patchwork
2025-05-27 21:35 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-05-27 21:37 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-05-27 21:40 ` ✗ CI.Build: failure " Patchwork
2025-05-28 7:45 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success " Patchwork
2025-05-28 7:45 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2025-05-28 7:46 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-05-28 7:50 ` ✗ CI.Build: failure " 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=aDjv2D4idRhGU0rS@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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