Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 16/27] drm/i915/guc: Insert submit fences between requests in parent-child relationship

[John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>]

On 8/20/2021 15:44, Matthew Brost wrote:
> The GuC must receive requests in the order submitted for contexts in a
> parent-child relationship to function correctly. To ensure this, insert
> a submit fence between the current request and last request submitted
> for requests / contexts in a parent child relationship. This is
> conceptually similar to a single timeline.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context.h       |   5 +
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h |   7 +
>   .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c |   5 +-
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c           | 120 ++++++++++++++----
>   4 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context.h
> index c2985822ab74..9dcc1b14697b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context.h
> @@ -75,6 +75,11 @@ intel_context_to_parent(struct intel_context *ce)
>           }
>   }
>   
> +static inline bool intel_context_is_parallel(struct intel_context *ce)
> +{
> +	return intel_context_is_child(ce) || intel_context_is_parent(ce);
> +}
> +
>   void intel_context_bind_parent_child(struct intel_context *parent,
>   				     struct intel_context *child);
>   
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h
> index 6f567ebeb039..a63329520c35 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h
> @@ -246,6 +246,13 @@ struct intel_context {
>   		 * work queue descriptor
>   		 */
>   		u8 parent_page;
> +
> +		/**
> +		 * @last_rq: last request submitted on a parallel context, used
> +		 * to insert submit fences between request in the parallel
request -> requests

With that fixed:
Reviewed-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>


> +		 * context.
> +		 */
> +		struct i915_request *last_rq;
>   	};
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_DRM_I915_SELFTEST
> 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 b107ad095248..f0b60fecf253 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -672,8 +672,7 @@ static int rq_prio(const struct i915_request *rq)
>   
>   static bool is_multi_lrc_rq(struct i915_request *rq)
>   {
> -	return intel_context_is_child(rq->context) ||
> -		intel_context_is_parent(rq->context);
> +	return intel_context_is_parallel(rq->context);
>   }
>   
>   static bool can_merge_rq(struct i915_request *rq,
> @@ -2843,6 +2842,8 @@ static void guc_parent_context_unpin(struct intel_context *ce)
>   	GEM_BUG_ON(!intel_context_is_parent(ce));
>   	GEM_BUG_ON(!intel_engine_is_virtual(ce->engine));
>   
> +	if (ce->last_rq)
> +		i915_request_put(ce->last_rq);
>   	unpin_guc_id(guc, ce);
>   	lrc_unpin(ce);
>   }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> index ce446716d092..2e51c8999088 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_request.c
> @@ -1546,36 +1546,62 @@ i915_request_await_object(struct i915_request *to,
>   	return ret;
>   }
>   
> +static inline bool is_parallel_rq(struct i915_request *rq)
> +{
> +	return intel_context_is_parallel(rq->context);
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct intel_context *request_to_parent(struct i915_request *rq)
> +{
> +	return intel_context_to_parent(rq->context);
> +}
> +
>   static struct i915_request *
> -__i915_request_add_to_timeline(struct i915_request *rq)
> +__i915_request_ensure_parallel_ordering(struct i915_request *rq,
> +					struct intel_timeline *timeline)
>   {
> -	struct intel_timeline *timeline = i915_request_timeline(rq);
>   	struct i915_request *prev;
>   
> -	/*
> -	 * Dependency tracking and request ordering along the timeline
> -	 * is special cased so that we can eliminate redundant ordering
> -	 * operations while building the request (we know that the timeline
> -	 * itself is ordered, and here we guarantee it).
> -	 *
> -	 * As we know we will need to emit tracking along the timeline,
> -	 * we embed the hooks into our request struct -- at the cost of
> -	 * having to have specialised no-allocation interfaces (which will
> -	 * be beneficial elsewhere).
> -	 *
> -	 * A second benefit to open-coding i915_request_await_request is
> -	 * that we can apply a slight variant of the rules specialised
> -	 * for timelines that jump between engines (such as virtual engines).
> -	 * If we consider the case of virtual engine, we must emit a dma-fence
> -	 * to prevent scheduling of the second request until the first is
> -	 * complete (to maximise our greedy late load balancing) and this
> -	 * precludes optimising to use semaphores serialisation of a single
> -	 * timeline across engines.
> -	 */
> +	GEM_BUG_ON(!is_parallel_rq(rq));
> +
> +	prev = request_to_parent(rq)->last_rq;
> +	if (prev) {
> +		if (!__i915_request_is_complete(prev)) {
> +			i915_sw_fence_await_sw_fence(&rq->submit,
> +						     &prev->submit,
> +						     &rq->submitq);
> +
> +			if (rq->engine->sched_engine->schedule)
> +				__i915_sched_node_add_dependency(&rq->sched,
> +								 &prev->sched,
> +								 &rq->dep,
> +								 0);
> +		}
> +		i915_request_put(prev);
> +	}
> +
> +	request_to_parent(rq)->last_rq = i915_request_get(rq);
> +
> +	return to_request(__i915_active_fence_set(&timeline->last_request,
> +						  &rq->fence));
> +}
> +
> +static struct i915_request *
> +__i915_request_ensure_ordering(struct i915_request *rq,
> +			       struct intel_timeline *timeline)
> +{
> +	struct i915_request *prev;
> +
> +	GEM_BUG_ON(is_parallel_rq(rq));
> +
>   	prev = to_request(__i915_active_fence_set(&timeline->last_request,
>   						  &rq->fence));
> +
>   	if (prev && !__i915_request_is_complete(prev)) {
>   		bool uses_guc = intel_engine_uses_guc(rq->engine);
> +		bool pow2 = is_power_of_2(READ_ONCE(prev->engine)->mask |
> +					  rq->engine->mask);
> +		bool same_context = prev->context == rq->context;
>   
>   		/*
>   		 * The requests are supposed to be kept in order. However,
> @@ -1583,13 +1609,11 @@ __i915_request_add_to_timeline(struct i915_request *rq)
>   		 * is used as a barrier for external modification to this
>   		 * context.
>   		 */
> -		GEM_BUG_ON(prev->context == rq->context &&
> +		GEM_BUG_ON(same_context &&
>   			   i915_seqno_passed(prev->fence.seqno,
>   					     rq->fence.seqno));
>   
> -		if ((!uses_guc &&
> -		     is_power_of_2(READ_ONCE(prev->engine)->mask | rq->engine->mask)) ||
> -		    (uses_guc && prev->context == rq->context))
> +		if ((same_context && uses_guc) || (!uses_guc && pow2))
>   			i915_sw_fence_await_sw_fence(&rq->submit,
>   						     &prev->submit,
>   						     &rq->submitq);
> @@ -1604,6 +1628,50 @@ __i915_request_add_to_timeline(struct i915_request *rq)
>   							 0);
>   	}
>   
> +	return prev;
> +}
> +
> +static struct i915_request *
> +__i915_request_add_to_timeline(struct i915_request *rq)
> +{
> +	struct intel_timeline *timeline = i915_request_timeline(rq);
> +	struct i915_request *prev;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Dependency tracking and request ordering along the timeline
> +	 * is special cased so that we can eliminate redundant ordering
> +	 * operations while building the request (we know that the timeline
> +	 * itself is ordered, and here we guarantee it).
> +	 *
> +	 * As we know we will need to emit tracking along the timeline,
> +	 * we embed the hooks into our request struct -- at the cost of
> +	 * having to have specialised no-allocation interfaces (which will
> +	 * be beneficial elsewhere).
> +	 *
> +	 * A second benefit to open-coding i915_request_await_request is
> +	 * that we can apply a slight variant of the rules specialised
> +	 * for timelines that jump between engines (such as virtual engines).
> +	 * If we consider the case of virtual engine, we must emit a dma-fence
> +	 * to prevent scheduling of the second request until the first is
> +	 * complete (to maximise our greedy late load balancing) and this
> +	 * precludes optimising to use semaphores serialisation of a single
> +	 * timeline across engines.
> +	 *
> +	 * We do not order parallel submission requests on the timeline as each
> +	 * parallel submission context has its own timeline and the ordering
> +	 * rules for parallel requests are that they must be submitted in the
> +	 * order received from the execbuf IOCTL. So rather than using the
> +	 * timeline we store a pointer to last request submitted in the
> +	 * relationship in the gem context and insert a submission fence
> +	 * between that request and request passed into this function or
> +	 * alternatively we use completion fence if gem context has a single
> +	 * timeline and this is the first submission of an execbuf IOCTL.
> +	 */
> +	if (likely(!is_parallel_rq(rq)))
> +		prev = __i915_request_ensure_ordering(rq, timeline);
> +	else
> +		prev = __i915_request_ensure_parallel_ordering(rq, timeline);
> +
>   	/*
>   	 * Make sure that no request gazumped us - if it was allocated after
>   	 * our i915_request_alloc() and called __i915_request_add() before