Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ghimiray, Himal Prasad" <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<tj@kernel.org>, <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
	<christian.koenig@amd.com>, <ltuikov89@gmail.com>,
	<daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] drm/sched: Use drm sched lockdep map for submit_wq
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 13:41:37 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b3025ea0-6573-4e78-b921-131ab6711c9c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZruxG8YaHqV1CAgS@DUT025-TGLU.fm.intel.com>



On 14-08-2024 00:46, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 11:05:31AM +0530, Ghimiray, Himal Prasad wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10-08-2024 03:58, Matthew Brost wrote:
>>> Avoid leaking a lockdep map on each drm sched creation and destruction
>>> by using a single lockdep map for all drm sched allocated submit_wq.
>>>
>>> v2:
>>>    - Use alloc_ordered_workqueue_lockdep_map (Tejun)
>>>
>>> Cc: Luben Tuikov <ltuikov89@gmail.com>
>>> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 11 +++++++++++
>>>    1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>>> index ab53ab486fe6..cf79d348cb32 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
>>> @@ -87,6 +87,12 @@
>>>    #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
>>>    #include "gpu_scheduler_trace.h"
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
>>> +static struct lockdep_map drm_sched_lockdep_map = {
>>> +	.name = "drm_sched_lockdep_map"
>>> +};
>>
>>
>> will it be better to use STATIC_LOCKDEP_MAP_INIT ? Initializing key here
>> instead of while registering the class ?
>>
> 
> Most existing design patterns in the kernel define static lockdep class
> this way so I think this is fine. But honestly don't really have an
> opinion here.
> 
> Matt

In that case, I have no concerns with the current initialization.


> 
>>
>>> +#endif
>>> +
>>>    #define to_drm_sched_job(sched_job)		\
>>>    		container_of((sched_job), struct drm_sched_job, queue_node)
>>> @@ -1272,7 +1278,12 @@ int drm_sched_init(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,
>>>    		sched->submit_wq = submit_wq;
>>>    		sched->own_submit_wq = false;
>>>    	} else {
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_LOCKDEP
>>> +		sched->submit_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue_lockdep_map(name, 0,
>>> +								       &drm_sched_lockdep_map);
>>> +#else
>>>    		sched->submit_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue(name, 0);
>>> +#endif
>>>    		if (!sched->submit_wq)
>>>    			return -ENOMEM;

  reply	other threads:[~2024-08-19  8:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-09 22:28 [PATCH v3 0/5] Use user-defined workqueue lockdep map for drm sched Matthew Brost
2024-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] workqueue: Split alloc_workqueue into internal function and lockdep init Matthew Brost
2024-08-13  6:13   ` kernel test robot
2024-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] workqueue: Change workqueue lockdep map to pointer Matthew Brost
2024-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] workqueue: Add interface for user-defined workqueue lockdep map Matthew Brost
2024-08-12  5:03   ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-08-13 18:52   ` Tejun Heo
2024-08-13 18:55     ` Matthew Brost
2024-08-13 19:05       ` Tejun Heo
2024-08-13 19:06   ` Tejun Heo
2024-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] drm/sched: Use drm sched lockdep map for submit_wq Matthew Brost
2024-08-12  5:35   ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-08-13 19:16     ` Matthew Brost
2024-08-19  8:11       ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad [this message]
2024-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] drm/xe: Drop GuC submit_wq pool Matthew Brost
2024-08-09 23:07 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Use user-defined workqueue lockdep map for drm sched (rev3) Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:08 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:09 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:20 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:23 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:24 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2024-08-09 23:55 ` ✗ CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2024-08-10  2:53 ` ✗ CI.FULL: " 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=b3025ea0-6573-4e78-b921-131ab6711c9c@intel.com \
    --to=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltuikov89@gmail.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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