All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/46] drm/i915/guc: Add hang check to GuC submit engine
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 11:18:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRJEXOUtdyi2yD5N@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210809190558.GA123848@DUT151-ICLU.fm.intel.com>

On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 07:05:58PM +0000, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 05:35:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:29:17PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > The heartbeat uses a single instance of a GuC submit engine (GSE) to do
> > > the hang check. As such if a different GSE's state machine hangs, the
> > > heartbeat cannot detect this hang. Add timer to each GSE which in turn
> > > can disable all submissions if it is hung.
> > > 
> > > Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  .../i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h   |  3 ++
> > >  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > index afb9b4bb8971..2d8296bcc583 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > @@ -105,15 +105,21 @@ static bool tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  	return test_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +/* 2 seconds seems like a reasonable timeout waiting for a G2H */
> > > +#define MAX_TASKLET_BLOCKED_NS	2000000000
> > >  static void set_tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  {
> > >  	lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> > > +	hrtimer_start_range_ns(&gse->hang_timer,
> > > +			       ns_to_ktime(MAX_TASKLET_BLOCKED_NS), 0,
> > > +			       HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED);
> > >  	set_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > 
> > So with drm/scheduler the reset handling is assumed to be
> > single-threaded, and there's quite complex rules around that. I've
> > recently worked with Boris Brezillion to clarify all this a bit and
> > improve docs. Does this all still work in that glorious future? Might be
> > good to at least sprinkle some comments/thoughts around in the commit
> > message about the envisaged future direction for all this stuff, to keep
> > people in the loop. Especially future people.
> > 
> > Ofc plan is still to just largely land all this.
> > 
> > Also: set_bit is an unordered atomic, which means you need barriers, which
> > meanes ... *insert the full rant about justifying/documenting lockless
> > algorithms from earlier *
> >
> 
> lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> 
> Not lockless. Also spin locks act as barriers, right?

Well if that spinlock is protecting that bit then that's good, but then it
shouldn't be an atomic set_bit. In that case:
- either make the entire bitfield non-atomic so it's clear there's boring
  dumb locking going on
- or split out your new bit into a separate field so that there's no false
  sharing with the existing bitfield state machinery, and add a kernel doc
  to that field explaining the locking

set_bit itself is atomic and unordered, so means you need barriers and all
that. If you don't have a lockless algorithm, don't use atomic bitops to
avoid confusing readers because set_bit/test_bit sets of all the warning
bells.

And yes it's annoying that for bitops the atomic ones don't have an
atomic_ prefix. The non-atomic ones have a __ prefix. This is honestly why
I don't think we should use bitfields as much as we do, because the main
use-case for them is when you have bitfields which are longer than 64bits.
They come from the cpumask world, and linux supports a lot of cpus.

Open-coding non-atomic simple bitfields with the usual C operators is
perfectly fine and legible imo. But that part is maybe more a bikeshed.

> > But I think this all falls out with the removal of the guc-id allocation
> > scheme?
> 
> Yes, this patch is getting deleted.

That works too :-)
-Daniel

> 
> Matt
> 
> > -Daniel
> > 
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  static void __clr_tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  {
> > >  	lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> > > +	hrtimer_cancel(&gse->hang_timer);
> > >  	clear_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > @@ -1028,6 +1034,7 @@ static void disable_submission(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > >  		if (__tasklet_is_enabled(&sched_engine->tasklet)) {
> > >  			GEM_BUG_ON(!guc->ct.enabled);
> > >  			__tasklet_disable_sync_once(&sched_engine->tasklet);
> > > +			hrtimer_try_to_cancel(&guc->gse[i]->hang_timer);
> > >  			sched_engine->tasklet.callback = NULL;
> > >  		}
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -3750,6 +3757,33 @@ static void guc_sched_engine_destroy(struct kref *kref)
> > >  	kfree(gse);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static enum hrtimer_restart gse_hang(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct guc_submit_engine *gse =
> > > +		container_of(hrtimer, struct guc_submit_engine, hang_timer);
> > > +	struct intel_guc *guc = gse->sched_engine.private_data;
> > > +
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_SELFTEST)
> > > +	if (guc->gse_hang_expected)
> > > +		drm_dbg(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +			"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +	else
> > > +		drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +			"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +#else
> > > +	drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +		"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Tasklet not making forward progress, disable submission which in turn
> > > +	 * will kick in the heartbeat to do a full GPU reset.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	disable_submission(guc);
> > > +
> > > +	return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static void guc_submit_engine_init(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > >  				   struct guc_submit_engine *gse,
> > >  				   int id)
> > > @@ -3767,6 +3801,8 @@ static void guc_submit_engine_init(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > >  	sched_engine->retire_inflight_request_prio =
> > >  		guc_retire_inflight_request_prio;
> > >  	sched_engine->private_data = guc;
> > > +	hrtimer_init(&gse->hang_timer, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, HRTIMER_MODE_REL);
> > > +	gse->hang_timer.function = gse_hang;
> > >  	gse->id = id;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > index a5933e07bdd2..eae2e9725ede 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
> > >  #ifndef _INTEL_GUC_SUBMISSION_TYPES_H_
> > >  #define _INTEL_GUC_SUBMISSION_TYPES_H_
> > >  
> > > +#include <linux/xarray.h>
> > > +
> > >  #include "gt/intel_engine_types.h"
> > >  #include "gt/intel_context_types.h"
> > >  #include "i915_scheduler_types.h"
> > > @@ -41,6 +43,7 @@ struct guc_submit_engine {
> > >  	unsigned long flags;
> > >  	int total_num_rq_with_no_guc_id;
> > >  	atomic_t num_guc_ids_not_ready;
> > > +	struct hrtimer hang_timer;
> > >  	int id;
> > >  
> > >  	/*
> > > -- 
> > > 2.28.0
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Daniel Vetter
> > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> > http://blog.ffwll.ch

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 20/46] drm/i915/guc: Add hang check to GuC submit engine
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 11:18:20 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YRJEXOUtdyi2yD5N@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210809190558.GA123848@DUT151-ICLU.fm.intel.com>

On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 07:05:58PM +0000, Matthew Brost wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 05:35:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 03:29:17PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> > > The heartbeat uses a single instance of a GuC submit engine (GSE) to do
> > > the hang check. As such if a different GSE's state machine hangs, the
> > > heartbeat cannot detect this hang. Add timer to each GSE which in turn
> > > can disable all submissions if it is hung.
> > > 
> > > Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  .../i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h   |  3 ++
> > >  2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > index afb9b4bb8971..2d8296bcc583 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> > > @@ -105,15 +105,21 @@ static bool tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  	return test_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +/* 2 seconds seems like a reasonable timeout waiting for a G2H */
> > > +#define MAX_TASKLET_BLOCKED_NS	2000000000
> > >  static void set_tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  {
> > >  	lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> > > +	hrtimer_start_range_ns(&gse->hang_timer,
> > > +			       ns_to_ktime(MAX_TASKLET_BLOCKED_NS), 0,
> > > +			       HRTIMER_MODE_REL_PINNED);
> > >  	set_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > 
> > So with drm/scheduler the reset handling is assumed to be
> > single-threaded, and there's quite complex rules around that. I've
> > recently worked with Boris Brezillion to clarify all this a bit and
> > improve docs. Does this all still work in that glorious future? Might be
> > good to at least sprinkle some comments/thoughts around in the commit
> > message about the envisaged future direction for all this stuff, to keep
> > people in the loop. Especially future people.
> > 
> > Ofc plan is still to just largely land all this.
> > 
> > Also: set_bit is an unordered atomic, which means you need barriers, which
> > meanes ... *insert the full rant about justifying/documenting lockless
> > algorithms from earlier *
> >
> 
> lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> 
> Not lockless. Also spin locks act as barriers, right?

Well if that spinlock is protecting that bit then that's good, but then it
shouldn't be an atomic set_bit. In that case:
- either make the entire bitfield non-atomic so it's clear there's boring
  dumb locking going on
- or split out your new bit into a separate field so that there's no false
  sharing with the existing bitfield state machinery, and add a kernel doc
  to that field explaining the locking

set_bit itself is atomic and unordered, so means you need barriers and all
that. If you don't have a lockless algorithm, don't use atomic bitops to
avoid confusing readers because set_bit/test_bit sets of all the warning
bells.

And yes it's annoying that for bitops the atomic ones don't have an
atomic_ prefix. The non-atomic ones have a __ prefix. This is honestly why
I don't think we should use bitfields as much as we do, because the main
use-case for them is when you have bitfields which are longer than 64bits.
They come from the cpumask world, and linux supports a lot of cpus.

Open-coding non-atomic simple bitfields with the usual C operators is
perfectly fine and legible imo. But that part is maybe more a bikeshed.

> > But I think this all falls out with the removal of the guc-id allocation
> > scheme?
> 
> Yes, this patch is getting deleted.

That works too :-)
-Daniel

> 
> Matt
> 
> > -Daniel
> > 
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  static void __clr_tasklet_blocked(struct guc_submit_engine *gse)
> > >  {
> > >  	lockdep_assert_held(&gse->sched_engine.lock);
> > > +	hrtimer_cancel(&gse->hang_timer);
> > >  	clear_bit(GSE_STATE_TASKLET_BLOCKED, &gse->flags);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > @@ -1028,6 +1034,7 @@ static void disable_submission(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > >  		if (__tasklet_is_enabled(&sched_engine->tasklet)) {
> > >  			GEM_BUG_ON(!guc->ct.enabled);
> > >  			__tasklet_disable_sync_once(&sched_engine->tasklet);
> > > +			hrtimer_try_to_cancel(&guc->gse[i]->hang_timer);
> > >  			sched_engine->tasklet.callback = NULL;
> > >  		}
> > >  	}
> > > @@ -3750,6 +3757,33 @@ static void guc_sched_engine_destroy(struct kref *kref)
> > >  	kfree(gse);
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static enum hrtimer_restart gse_hang(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct guc_submit_engine *gse =
> > > +		container_of(hrtimer, struct guc_submit_engine, hang_timer);
> > > +	struct intel_guc *guc = gse->sched_engine.private_data;
> > > +
> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_SELFTEST)
> > > +	if (guc->gse_hang_expected)
> > > +		drm_dbg(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +			"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +	else
> > > +		drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +			"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +#else
> > > +	drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> > > +		"GSE[%i] hung, disabling submission", gse->id);
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Tasklet not making forward progress, disable submission which in turn
> > > +	 * will kick in the heartbeat to do a full GPU reset.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	disable_submission(guc);
> > > +
> > > +	return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static void guc_submit_engine_init(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > >  				   struct guc_submit_engine *gse,
> > >  				   int id)
> > > @@ -3767,6 +3801,8 @@ static void guc_submit_engine_init(struct intel_guc *guc,
> > >  	sched_engine->retire_inflight_request_prio =
> > >  		guc_retire_inflight_request_prio;
> > >  	sched_engine->private_data = guc;
> > > +	hrtimer_init(&gse->hang_timer, CLOCK_MONOTONIC, HRTIMER_MODE_REL);
> > > +	gse->hang_timer.function = gse_hang;
> > >  	gse->id = id;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > index a5933e07bdd2..eae2e9725ede 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission_types.h
> > > @@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
> > >  #ifndef _INTEL_GUC_SUBMISSION_TYPES_H_
> > >  #define _INTEL_GUC_SUBMISSION_TYPES_H_
> > >  
> > > +#include <linux/xarray.h>
> > > +
> > >  #include "gt/intel_engine_types.h"
> > >  #include "gt/intel_context_types.h"
> > >  #include "i915_scheduler_types.h"
> > > @@ -41,6 +43,7 @@ struct guc_submit_engine {
> > >  	unsigned long flags;
> > >  	int total_num_rq_with_no_guc_id;
> > >  	atomic_t num_guc_ids_not_ready;
> > > +	struct hrtimer hang_timer;
> > >  	int id;
> > >  
> > >  	/*
> > > -- 
> > > 2.28.0
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Daniel Vetter
> > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> > http://blog.ffwll.ch

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch

  reply	other threads:[~2021-08-10  9:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 186+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-03 22:28 [PATCH 00/46] Parallel submission aka multi-bb execbuf Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:28 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:28 ` [PATCH 01/46] drm/i915/guc: Allow flexible number of context ids Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:28   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:28 ` [PATCH 02/46] drm/i915/guc: Connect the number of guc_ids to debugfs Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:28   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 03/46] drm/i915/guc: Don't return -EAGAIN to user when guc_ids exhausted Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-05  8:27   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05  8:27     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 04/46] drm/i915/guc: Don't allow requests not ready to consume all guc_ids Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-05  8:29   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 05/46] drm/i915/guc: Introduce guc_submit_engine object Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 06/46] drm/i915/guc: Check return of __xa_store when registering a context Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 07/46] drm/i915/guc: Non-static lrc descriptor registration buffer Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 08/46] drm/i915/guc: Take GT PM ref when deregistering context Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 09/46] drm/i915: Add GT PM unpark worker Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 10/46] drm/i915/guc: Take engine PM when a context is pinned with GuC submission Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 14:23   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 14:23     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:11     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 18:11       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  6:43       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  6:43         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10 21:29         ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-10 21:29           ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 11/46] drm/i915/guc: Don't call switch_to_kernel_context " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 14:27   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:20     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  6:47       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 17:47         ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 12/46] drm/i915/guc: Selftest for GuC flow control Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 13/46] drm/i915: Add logical engine mapping Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 14:28   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 14:28     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:28     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 18:28       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  6:49       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  6:49         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 14/46] drm/i915: Expose logical engine instance to user Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 14:30   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 14:30     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:37     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 18:37       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  6:53       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  6:53         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 17:55         ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-11 17:55           ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 15/46] drm/i915/guc: Introduce context parent-child relationship Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 14:37   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 14:40     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:45       ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 18:44     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  8:45       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 16/46] drm/i915/guc: Implement GuC parent-child context pin / unpin functions Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 15:17   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 18:58     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  8:53       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  9:07         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 18:06           ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-12 14:45             ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 14:52               ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 18:23         ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 17/46] drm/i915/guc: Add multi-lrc context registration Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 18/46] drm/i915/guc: Ensure GuC schedule operations do not operate on child contexts Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 19/46] drm/i915/guc: Assign contexts in parent-child relationship consecutive guc_ids Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 15:31   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 15:31     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 19:03     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 19:03       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  9:12       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  9:12         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 20/46] drm/i915/guc: Add hang check to GuC submit engine Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 15:35   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 15:35     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 19:05     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 19:05       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  9:18       ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-08-10  9:18         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 21/46] drm/i915/guc: Add guc_child_context_destroy Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 15:36   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 19:06     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 22/46] drm/i915/guc: Implement multi-lrc submission Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 23/46] drm/i915/guc: Insert submit fences between requests in parent-child relationship Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 16:32   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 16:39     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 17:03       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 24/46] drm/i915/guc: Implement multi-lrc reset Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 25/46] drm/i915/guc: Update debugfs for GuC multi-lrc Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 16:36   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 16:36     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 19:13     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 19:13       ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-10  9:23       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  9:23         ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  9:27         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10  9:27           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-10 17:29           ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-10 17:29             ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-11 10:04             ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 10:04               ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 17:35               ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-11 17:35                 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 26/46] drm/i915: Connect UAPI to GuC multi-lrc interface Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 16:37   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 16:37     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 27/46] drm/i915/doc: Update parallel submit doc to point to i915_drm.h Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 28/46] drm/i915/guc: Add basic GuC multi-lrc selftest Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 29/46] drm/i915/guc: Extend GuC flow control selftest for multi-lrc Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 30/46] drm/i915/guc: Implement no mid batch preemption " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 31/46] drm/i915: Move secure execbuf check to execbuf2 Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 32/46] drm/i915: Move input/exec fence handling to i915_gem_execbuffer2 Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 33/46] drm/i915: Move output " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 34/46] drm/i915: Return output fence from i915_gem_do_execbuffer Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 35/46] drm/i915: Store batch index in struct i915_execbuffer Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 36/46] drm/i915: Allow callers of i915_gem_do_execbuffer to override the batch index Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 37/46] drm/i915: Teach execbuf there can be more than one batch in the objects list Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 38/46] drm/i915: Only track object dependencies on first request Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 39/46] drm/i915: Force parallel contexts to use copy engine for reloc Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 16:39   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 16:39     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 40/46] drm/i915: Multi-batch execbuffer2 Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 17:02   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 17:02     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 41/46] drm/i915: Eliminate unnecessary VMA calls for multi-BB submission Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 17:07   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 17:12     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 42/46] drm/i915: Hold all parallel requests until last request, properly handle error Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 43/46] drm/i915/guc: Handle errors in multi-lrc requests Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 44/46] drm/i915: Enable multi-bb execbuf Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 45/46] drm/i915/execlists: Weak parallel submission support for execlists Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29 ` [PATCH 46/46] drm/i915/guc: Add delay before disabling scheduling on contexts Matthew Brost
2021-08-03 22:29   ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Brost
2021-08-09 17:17   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-09 19:32     ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-11  9:55       ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-11 17:43         ` Matthew Brost
2021-08-12 14:04           ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:26   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-03 22:51 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for Parallel submission aka multi-bb execbuf (rev2) Patchwork
2021-08-03 22:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2021-08-03 22:57 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.DOCS: " Patchwork
2021-08-03 23:19 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-08-05  3:53 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " 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=YRJEXOUtdyi2yD5N@phenom.ffwll.local \
    --to=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=matthew.brost@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.