dri-devel.lists.freedesktop.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
To: "Ben Skeggs" <skeggsb@gmail.com>,
	"Christian König" <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	ML nouveau <nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	ML dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	dmoulding@me.com, Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>,
	Stefan Fritsch <sf@sfritsch.de>
Subject: Re: [Nouveau] [PATCH] drm/nouveau: wait for the exclusive fence after the shared ones v2
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2021 11:11:15 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c0e77c90-ad42-29ed-7bc6-68f45dbbcfc2@leemhuis.info> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACAvsv7D7=Mud1YQ+GACFAqdvBGNp3rjY-eudkXy3uaefY6q+Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker speaking.

CCing Dave and Daniel.

On 15.12.21 23:32, Ben Skeggs wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 2021 at 19:19, Christian König
> <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Am 11.12.21 um 10:59 schrieb Stefan Fritsch:
>>> On 09.12.21 11:23, Christian König wrote:
>>>> Always waiting for the exclusive fence resulted on some performance
>>>> regressions. So try to wait for the shared fences first, then the
>>>> exclusive fence should always be signaled already.
>>>>
>>>> v2: fix incorrectly placed "(", add some comment why we do this.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Stefan Fritsch <sf@sfritsch.de>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>>
>>> Please also add a cc for linux-stable, so that this is fixed in 5.15.x
>>
>> Sure, but I still need some acked-by or rb from one of the Nouveau guys.
>> So gentle ping on that.
> Acked-by: Ben Skeggs <bskeggs@redhat.com>

What's the status of this patch? I checked a few git trees, but either
it's not there or it missed it.

Reminder, it's a regression already introduced in v5.15, hence all users
of the current stable kernel are affected by it, so it would be nice to
get the fix on its way now that Ben acked it and Dan tested it.

Ciao, Thorsten

P.S.: As a Linux kernel regression tracker I'm getting a lot of reports
on my table. I can only look briefly into most of them. Unfortunately
therefore I sometimes will get things wrong or miss something important.
I hope that's not the case here; if you think it is, don't hesitate to
tell me about it in a public reply. That's in everyone's interest, as
what I wrote above might be misleading to everyone reading this; any
suggestion I gave thus might sent someone reading this down the wrong
rabbit hole, which none of us wants.

BTW, I have no personal interest in this issue, which is tracked using
regzbot, my Linux kernel regression tracking bot
(https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/regzbot/). I'm only posting
this mail to get things rolling again and hence don't need to be CC on
all further activities wrt to this regression.

#regzbot poke

>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c | 28 +++++++++++++------------
>>>>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c
>>>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c
>>>> index 05d0b3eb3690..0ae416aa76dc 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_fence.c
>>>> @@ -353,15 +353,22 @@ nouveau_fence_sync(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo,
>>>> struct nouveau_channel *chan, bool e
>>>>             if (ret)
>>>>               return ret;
>>>> -    }
>>>>   -    fobj = dma_resv_shared_list(resv);
>>>> -    fence = dma_resv_excl_fence(resv);
>>>> +        fobj = NULL;
>>>> +    } else {
>>>> +        fobj = dma_resv_shared_list(resv);
>>>> +    }
>>>>   -    if (fence) {
>>>> +    /* Waiting for the exclusive fence first causes performance
>>>> regressions
>>>> +     * under some circumstances. So manually wait for the shared
>>>> ones first.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    for (i = 0; i < (fobj ? fobj->shared_count : 0) && !ret; ++i) {
>>>>           struct nouveau_channel *prev = NULL;
>>>>           bool must_wait = true;
>>>>   +        fence = rcu_dereference_protected(fobj->shared[i],
>>>> +                        dma_resv_held(resv));
>>>> +
>>>>           f = nouveau_local_fence(fence, chan->drm);
>>>>           if (f) {
>>>>               rcu_read_lock();
>>>> @@ -373,20 +380,13 @@ nouveau_fence_sync(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo,
>>>> struct nouveau_channel *chan, bool e
>>>>             if (must_wait)
>>>>               ret = dma_fence_wait(fence, intr);
>>>> -
>>>> -        return ret;
>>>>       }
>>>>   -    if (!exclusive || !fobj)
>>>> -        return ret;
>>>> -
>>>> -    for (i = 0; i < fobj->shared_count && !ret; ++i) {
>>>> +    fence = dma_resv_excl_fence(resv);
>>>> +    if (fence) {
>>>>           struct nouveau_channel *prev = NULL;
>>>>           bool must_wait = true;
>>>>   -        fence = rcu_dereference_protected(fobj->shared[i],
>>>> -                        dma_resv_held(resv));
>>>> -
>>>>           f = nouveau_local_fence(fence, chan->drm);
>>>>           if (f) {
>>>>               rcu_read_lock();
>>>> @@ -398,6 +398,8 @@ nouveau_fence_sync(struct nouveau_bo *nvbo,
>>>> struct nouveau_channel *chan, bool e
>>>>             if (must_wait)
>>>>               ret = dma_fence_wait(fence, intr);
>>>> +
>>>> +        return ret;
>>>>       }
>>>>         return ret;
>>


  reply	other threads:[~2021-12-21 10:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-09 10:23 [PATCH] drm/nouveau: wait for the exclusive fence after the shared ones v2 Christian König
2021-12-10  9:06 ` [Nouveau] " Thorsten Leemhuis
2021-12-11  9:59 ` Stefan Fritsch
2021-12-14  9:19   ` Christian König
2021-12-15 22:32     ` [Nouveau] " Ben Skeggs
2021-12-21 10:11       ` Thorsten Leemhuis [this message]
2021-12-21 10:20         ` Christian König
2021-12-20 19:17 ` Dan Moulding

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=c0e77c90-ad42-29ed-7bc6-68f45dbbcfc2@leemhuis.info \
    --to=regressions@leemhuis.info \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=bskeggs@redhat.com \
    --cc=ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com \
    --cc=dmoulding@me.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=sf@sfritsch.de \
    --cc=skeggsb@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).