All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+
Date: Fri, 08 May 2020 08:58:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <158891748855.5249.8585589207741654136@jlahtine-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPM=9tyhj+KNDFdw1nk0GASwfY5dwq2kAcxQ4oSHMt2BNyycVw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Dave Airlie (2020-05-07 21:27:27)
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 01:44, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Jason Ekstrand (2020-05-07 16:36:00)
> > > The Vulkan driver in Mesa for Intel hardware never uses relocations if
> > > it's running on a version of i915 that supports at least softpin which
> > > all versions of i915 supporting Gen12 do.  On the OpenGL side, Gen12 is
> > > only supported by iris which never uses relocations.  The older i965
> > > driver in Mesa does use relocations but it only supports Intel hardware
> > > through Gen11 and has been deprecated for all hardware Gen9+. The entire
> > > relocation UAPI and related infrastructure, therefore, doesn't have any
> > > open-source userspace consumer starting with Gen12.
> > >
> > > Rejecting relocations starting with Gen12 has the benefit that we don't
> > > have to bother supporting it on platforms with local memory.  Given how
> > > much CPU touching of memory is required for relocations, not having to
> > > do so on platforms where not all memory is directly CPU-accessible
> > > carries significant advantages.
> >
> > You are not supplying them, the kernel is not checking them [as they
> > don't exist], so there is no material benefit. The only question is
> > maintainability.
> >
> > How confident are you that you will never use them and rewrite the
> > media-driver? The code exists, will be tested, and can just as easily
> > expire with the rest of execbuffer2.
> 
> From an upstream POV I say hell yes, if the hw isn't generally available yet,
> and the media-driver/intel-compute-runtime people are warned in advance,
> 
> I'm all in on ripping it out for new GENs.

There have been discussions with our media driver team about eliminating
any relocations, but today they are still being used. They have started
partially using soft-pinning, which is a great first step to that
direction.

The compute driver does not rely on relocations, they use soft-pinning
everywhere and explicitly manage the address space.

Be assured that I'm also in favor of eliminating relocations (just like
execbuffer2, userptr and couple other things), just that we still need
to have a functional stack before they can be dropped for new hardware.

Like Chris mentioned, enough optimization have been put in the code so
that there is zero impact from the relocations to the exclusively
soft-pinning drivers. So the sole benefit would be being able to drop
the relocations code in the future when the Gen11 hardware has gone
exctinct and that is a worthy goal, too.

But for now the feature is still needed for Gen12, so forcefully
disabling it is untimely.

Regards, Joonas
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>,
	Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+
Date: Fri, 08 May 2020 08:58:08 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <158891748855.5249.8585589207741654136@jlahtine-desk.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPM=9tyhj+KNDFdw1nk0GASwfY5dwq2kAcxQ4oSHMt2BNyycVw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Dave Airlie (2020-05-07 21:27:27)
> On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 01:44, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Jason Ekstrand (2020-05-07 16:36:00)
> > > The Vulkan driver in Mesa for Intel hardware never uses relocations if
> > > it's running on a version of i915 that supports at least softpin which
> > > all versions of i915 supporting Gen12 do.  On the OpenGL side, Gen12 is
> > > only supported by iris which never uses relocations.  The older i965
> > > driver in Mesa does use relocations but it only supports Intel hardware
> > > through Gen11 and has been deprecated for all hardware Gen9+. The entire
> > > relocation UAPI and related infrastructure, therefore, doesn't have any
> > > open-source userspace consumer starting with Gen12.
> > >
> > > Rejecting relocations starting with Gen12 has the benefit that we don't
> > > have to bother supporting it on platforms with local memory.  Given how
> > > much CPU touching of memory is required for relocations, not having to
> > > do so on platforms where not all memory is directly CPU-accessible
> > > carries significant advantages.
> >
> > You are not supplying them, the kernel is not checking them [as they
> > don't exist], so there is no material benefit. The only question is
> > maintainability.
> >
> > How confident are you that you will never use them and rewrite the
> > media-driver? The code exists, will be tested, and can just as easily
> > expire with the rest of execbuffer2.
> 
> From an upstream POV I say hell yes, if the hw isn't generally available yet,
> and the media-driver/intel-compute-runtime people are warned in advance,
> 
> I'm all in on ripping it out for new GENs.

There have been discussions with our media driver team about eliminating
any relocations, but today they are still being used. They have started
partially using soft-pinning, which is a great first step to that
direction.

The compute driver does not rely on relocations, they use soft-pinning
everywhere and explicitly manage the address space.

Be assured that I'm also in favor of eliminating relocations (just like
execbuffer2, userptr and couple other things), just that we still need
to have a functional stack before they can be dropped for new hardware.

Like Chris mentioned, enough optimization have been put in the code so
that there is zero impact from the relocations to the exclusively
soft-pinning drivers. So the sole benefit would be being able to drop
the relocations code in the future when the Gen11 hardware has gone
exctinct and that is a worthy goal, too.

But for now the feature is still needed for Gen12, so forcefully
disabling it is untimely.

Regards, Joonas
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-08  5:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-07 15:36 [PATCH] RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+ Jason Ekstrand
2020-05-07 15:36 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2020-05-07 15:44 ` Chris Wilson
2020-05-07 15:44   ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2020-05-07 16:00   ` Jason Ekstrand
2020-05-07 16:00     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2020-05-07 18:27   ` Dave Airlie
2020-05-07 18:27     ` [Intel-gfx] " Dave Airlie
2020-05-08  5:58     ` Joonas Lahtinen [this message]
2020-05-08  5:58       ` Joonas Lahtinen
2020-06-25 17:22       ` Dave Airlie
2020-06-25 17:22         ` [Intel-gfx] " Dave Airlie
2020-05-07 16:27 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for " Patchwork
2021-03-10 21:26 ` [PATCH] i915: Drop relocation support on all new hardware Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-10 21:26   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-10 21:50   ` [PATCH] i915: Drop relocation support on all new hardware (v3) Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-10 21:50     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-10 22:56     ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-10 22:56       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11  8:14     ` Lucas De Marchi
2021-03-11  8:14       ` Lucas De Marchi
2021-03-11 10:20       ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-11 10:20         ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-11  9:54     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-11  9:54       ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-11 11:44     ` Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 11:44       ` [Intel-gfx] " Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 15:50       ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 15:50         ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 15:57         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-03-11 15:57           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-03-11 16:24           ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 16:24             ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 16:50             ` Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 16:50               ` [Intel-gfx] " Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 17:18               ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 17:18                 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 18:19                 ` Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 18:19                   ` [Intel-gfx] " Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-11 18:57                   ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 18:57                     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-12 14:16                     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-03-12 14:16                       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-03-11 16:31       ` Chris Wilson
2021-03-11 16:31         ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2021-03-11 16:40         ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 16:40           ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 16:26     ` [PATCH] drm/i915/gem: Drop relocation support on all new hardware (v4) Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-11 18:17     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-12  9:28       ` Zbigniew Kempczyński
2021-03-12  9:50       ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-12 10:56         ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-12 11:33           ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-03-12 11:52             ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-12 11:47           ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-12 12:16             ` Matthew Auld
2021-03-12 14:52               ` Jason Ekstrand
2021-03-12 15:20                 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-03-10 21:42 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+ (rev2) Patchwork
2021-03-10 22:11 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-03-10 23:47 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+ (rev3) Patchwork
2021-03-11  2:32 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-03-11 18:41 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for RFC: i915: Drop relocation support on Gen12+ (rev4) Patchwork
2021-03-11 19:10 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " 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=158891748855.5249.8585589207741654136@jlahtine-desk.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=airlied@redhat.com \
    --cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jason@jlekstrand.net \
    /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.