From: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@linux.intel.com>
To: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: nirmoy.das@intel.com, farah.kassabri@intel.com,
michal.wajdeczko@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] Proper GT TLB invalidation layering and new coalescing feature.
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 18:08:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b008d72f-8123-4f3e-827f-9e5fd9368983@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6aba8e53-55fd-4573-ad0c-e8c62ebe1297@intel.com>
On 7/9/2024 11:57 AM, Matthew Auld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 08/07/2024 05:03, Matthew Brost wrote:
>> While debuging [1] an issue was identified in which if too many GT TLB
>> invalidations are issued to the GuC, the GuC can get overwhelmed to the
>> point scheduling of jobs starts to stall. To avoid this, hold and
>> coalesce GT TLB invalidations in the KMD if a watermark of pending
>> invalidations is past. Add gitlab for this issue has also been opened
>> [2].
>>
>> Layering issues with GT TLB invalidations are known [3] which needed to
>> be fixed first before adding this new feature.
>>
>> - Patches 1-8 fix the layering.
>> - Patches 9-11 add coalescing feature.
>>
>> We could merge these two as seperate series if needed.
>>
>> CCing various stakeholders (Farah, Michal, Nirmoy) which have raised GT
>> TLB invalidation issues in the past.
>
> Maybe worth mentioning for [1], we try to process TLB invalidations
> directly from the irq, however we also only process the g2h queue
> in-order, so if there is something other than TLB invalidation or
> fault earlier in the queue then we do nothing useful from the irq and
> just return, that is until the wq can eventually process those earlier
> items that couldn't be processed directly from the irq. In the past
Seen this recently :
<3> [3763.731822] xe 0000:03:00.0: [drm] *ERROR* GT0: g2h outstanding: 611
<snip>
<6> [3727.857273] [IGT] xe_evict: executing
<3> [3730.165480] xe 0000:03:00.0: [drm] *ERROR* TILE0 [GTT] GT0: TLB
invalidation time'd out, seqno=26858, recv=2685
Which I think fits your description. This series should help but not
sure how much.
Regards,
Nirmoy
> I have seen TLB timeouts where the TLB invalidation is clearly in the
> g2h queue (and has been for a while), but is stuck behind something
> earlier in the queue that needs the wq, but system is under such a
> heavy load that the wq can't be scheduled in a timely manner.
>
>>
>> v2:
>> - Fix CI issues
>> - Clean up some of the series / patch structure
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> [1]
>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/issues/799#note_2449497
>> [2] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/xe/kernel/-/issues/2162
>> [3] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/133001/
>>
>> Matthew Brost (11):
>> drm/xe: Add xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init helper
>> drm/xe: Drop xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_wait
>> drm/xe: s/tlb_invalidation.lock/tlb_invalidation.fence_lock
>> drm/xe: Add tlb_invalidation.seqno_lock
>> drm/xe: Add xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_done_handler
>> drm/xe: Add send tlb invalidation helpers
>> drm/xe: Add xe_guc_tlb_invalidation layer
>> drm/xe: Add multi-client support for GT TLB invalidations
>> drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation coalescing
>> drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation coalesce tracepoints
>> drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation watermark debugfs
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_debugfs.c | 38 ++
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 3 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h | 5 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt.c | 21 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ggtt_types.h | 5 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.c | 641 ++++++++++++------
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation.h | 26 +-
>> .../gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_types.h | 41 ++
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_types.h | 43 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c | 2 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_invalidation.c | 145 ++++
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_invalidation.h | 18 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pt.c | 33 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_trace.h | 10 +
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm.c | 45 +-
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_vm_types.h | 3 +
>> 17 files changed, 801 insertions(+), 279 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_invalidation.c
>> create mode 100644 drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_tlb_invalidation.h
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-09 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-08 4:03 [PATCH v2 00/11] Proper GT TLB invalidation layering and new coalescing feature Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] drm/xe: Add xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_fence_init helper Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 15:56 ` Nirmoy Das
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] drm/xe: Drop xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_wait Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 15:57 ` Nirmoy Das
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] drm/xe: s/tlb_invalidation.lock/tlb_invalidation.fence_lock Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 15:57 ` Nirmoy Das
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] drm/xe: Add tlb_invalidation.seqno_lock Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] drm/xe: Add xe_gt_tlb_invalidation_done_handler Matthew Brost
2025-07-23 17:22 ` Summers, Stuart
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] drm/xe: Add send tlb invalidation helpers Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] drm/xe: Add xe_guc_tlb_invalidation layer Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 21:31 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2024-07-10 4:02 ` Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] drm/xe: Add multi-client support for GT TLB invalidations Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation coalescing Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation coalesce tracepoints Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:03 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] drm/xe: Add GT TLB invalidation watermark debugfs Matthew Brost
2024-07-08 4:08 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Proper GT TLB invalidation layering and new coalescing feature. (rev2) Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:09 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning " Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:10 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:22 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:24 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:25 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2024-07-08 4:51 ` ✓ CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2024-07-08 5:46 ` ✗ CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork
2024-07-09 9:57 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] Proper GT TLB invalidation layering and new coalescing feature Matthew Auld
2024-07-09 16:08 ` Nirmoy Das [this message]
2024-07-09 16:35 ` Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 16:42 ` Nirmoy Das
2024-07-09 21:23 ` Matthew Brost
2024-07-09 16:31 ` Matthew Brost
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=b008d72f-8123-4f3e-827f-9e5fd9368983@linux.intel.com \
--to=nirmoy.das@linux.intel.com \
--cc=farah.kassabri@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=matthew.auld@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=nirmoy.das@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