From: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
To: Brian Nguyen <brian3.nguyen@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <tejas.upadhyay@intel.com>,
<shuicheng.lin@intel.com>, <stuart.summers@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] drm/xe: Reset tlb fence timeout on invalid seqno received
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2025 10:25:10 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aSIABv+iT+ZJX6sk@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251118090552.246243-3-brian3.nguyen@intel.com>
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 05:05:43PM +0800, Brian Nguyen wrote:
> TLB_INVALIDATION_SEQNO_INVALID are now used to indicate in progress
> multi-step TLB invalidations, so reset tdr to ensure that action
> won't prematurely trigger when G2H actions are still ongoing.
>
I think thid patch makes sense but comments below.
> Signed-off-by: Brian Nguyen <brian3.nguyen@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_inval.c | 2 ++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_inval.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_inval.c
> index f1fd2dd90742..cd126c53faab 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_inval.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_inval.c
> @@ -238,6 +238,8 @@ int xe_guc_tlb_inval_done_handler(struct xe_guc *guc, u32 *msg, u32 len)
>
> if (msg[0] != TLB_INVALIDATION_SEQNO_INVALID)
> xe_tlb_inval_done_handler(>->tlb_inval, msg[0]);
> + else
> + xe_tlb_inval_reset_timeout(>->tlb_inval);
>
> return 0;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.c
> index 918a59e686ea..50f05d6b5672 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.c
> @@ -199,6 +199,22 @@ void xe_tlb_inval_reset(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval)
> mutex_unlock(&tlb_inval->seqno_lock);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * xe_tlb_inval_reset_timeout() - Reset TLB inval fence timeout
> + * @tlb_inval: TLB invalidation client
> + *
> + * Reset the TLB invalidation timeout timer.
> + */
> +void xe_tlb_inval_reset_timeout(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&tlb_inval->pending_lock, flags);
> + mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &tlb_inval->fence_tdr,
> + tlb_inval->ops->timeout_delay(tlb_inval));
You don't need a lock for this. It is done in xe_tlb_inval_done_handler
under this lock as the pending list of TLB invalidations, which
pending_lock protects, is tied to whether we want to reschedule the
timeout or cancel it. So please drop the lock here and then also update
xe_tlb_inval_done_handler to call this new helper.
Matt
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tlb_inval->pending_lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> static bool xe_tlb_inval_seqno_past(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval, int seqno)
> {
> int seqno_recv = READ_ONCE(tlb_inval->seqno_recv);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.h
> index 05614915463a..9dbddc310eb9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval.h
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ struct xe_vm;
> int xe_gt_tlb_inval_init_early(struct xe_gt *gt);
>
> void xe_tlb_inval_reset(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval);
> +void xe_tlb_inval_reset_timeout(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval);
> int xe_tlb_inval_all(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval,
> struct xe_tlb_inval_fence *fence);
> int xe_tlb_inval_ggtt(struct xe_tlb_inval *tlb_inval);
> --
> 2.51.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-22 18:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-18 9:05 [PATCH 00/11] Page Reclamation Support for Xe3p Platforms Brian Nguyen
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 01/11] [DO, NOT, REVIEW] drm/xe: Do not forward invalid TLB invalidation seqnos to upper layers Brian Nguyen
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 02/11] drm/xe: Reset tlb fence timeout on invalid seqno received Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 17:23 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 1:53 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-22 18:25 ` Matthew Brost [this message]
2025-11-25 11:01 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 03/11] drm/xe/xe_tlb_inval: Modify fence interface to support PPC flush Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 18:02 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 1:54 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-22 19:32 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 11:07 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 04/11] drm/xe: Add page reclamation info to device info Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 18:15 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 18:31 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 05/11] drm/xe/guc: Add page reclamation interface to GuC Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 18:32 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 1:56 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-22 18:39 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 11:13 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 06/11] drm/xe: Create page reclaim list on unbind Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 21:29 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 1:57 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-22 19:18 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 11:18 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-25 18:34 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 19:01 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-25 19:07 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 19:46 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-25 22:35 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-26 2:33 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 07/11] drm/xe: Suballocate BO for page reclaim Brian Nguyen
2025-11-22 19:42 ` Matthew Brost
2025-11-25 11:20 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 08/11] drm/xe: Prep page reclaim in tlb inval job Brian Nguyen
2025-11-22 13:52 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-11-25 11:20 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 09/11] drm/xe: Append page reclamation action to tlb inval Brian Nguyen
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 10/11] drm/xe: Optimize flushing of L2$ by skipping unnecessary page reclaim Brian Nguyen
2025-11-24 12:29 ` Matthew Auld
2025-11-25 6:12 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-25 11:48 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2025-11-25 13:05 ` Upadhyay, Tejas
2025-11-18 9:05 ` [PATCH 11/11] drm/xe: Add debugfs support for page reclamation Brian Nguyen
2025-11-21 22:32 ` Lin, Shuicheng
2025-11-22 1:57 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-22 14:18 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2025-11-25 11:21 ` Nguyen, Brian3
2025-11-18 9:52 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Page Reclamation Support for Xe3p Platforms Patchwork
2025-11-18 9:53 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-11-18 13:02 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: 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=aSIABv+iT+ZJX6sk@lstrano-desk.jf.intel.com \
--to=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=brian3.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=shuicheng.lin@intel.com \
--cc=stuart.summers@intel.com \
--cc=tejas.upadhyay@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