All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
To: DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: "Intel Graphics Development" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	"Lucas Stach" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Jason Ekstrand" <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Subject: [PATCH v5 19/20] drm/i915: Don't break exclusive fence ordering
Date: Thu,  5 Aug 2021 12:47:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210805104705.862416-20-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210805104705.862416-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

There's only one exclusive slot, and we must not break the ordering.
Adding a new exclusive fence drops all previous fences from the
dma_resv. To avoid violating the signalling order we err on the side of
over-synchronizing by waiting for the existing fences, even if
userspace asked us to ignore them.

A better fix would be to us a dma_fence_chain or _array like e.g.
amdgpu now uses, but it probably makes sense to lift this into
dma-resv.c code as a proper concept, so that drivers don't have to
hack up their own solution each on their own. Hence go with the simple
fix for now.

Another option is the fence import ioctl from Jason:

https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20210610210925.642582-7-jason@jlekstrand.net/

v2: Improve commit message per Lucas' suggestion.

Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 1ed7475de454..25ba2765d27d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -2240,6 +2240,7 @@ static int eb_move_to_gpu(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 		struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
 		unsigned int flags = ev->flags;
 		struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = vma->obj;
+		bool async, write;
 
 		assert_vma_held(vma);
 
@@ -2271,7 +2272,10 @@ static int eb_move_to_gpu(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 				flags &= ~EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC;
 		}
 
-		if (err == 0 && !(flags & EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC)) {
+		async = flags & EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC;
+		write = flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE;
+
+		if (err == 0 && (!async || write)) {
 			err = i915_request_await_object
 				(eb->request, obj, flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE);
 		}
-- 
2.32.0


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
To: DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: "Intel Graphics Development" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
	"Lucas Stach" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
	"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
	"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Jason Ekstrand" <jason@jlekstrand.net>
Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/20] drm/i915: Don't break exclusive fence ordering
Date: Thu,  5 Aug 2021 12:47:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210805104705.862416-20-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210805104705.862416-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

There's only one exclusive slot, and we must not break the ordering.
Adding a new exclusive fence drops all previous fences from the
dma_resv. To avoid violating the signalling order we err on the side of
over-synchronizing by waiting for the existing fences, even if
userspace asked us to ignore them.

A better fix would be to us a dma_fence_chain or _array like e.g.
amdgpu now uses, but it probably makes sense to lift this into
dma-resv.c code as a proper concept, so that drivers don't have to
hack up their own solution each on their own. Hence go with the simple
fix for now.

Another option is the fence import ioctl from Jason:

https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20210610210925.642582-7-jason@jlekstrand.net/

v2: Improve commit message per Lucas' suggestion.

Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@jlekstrand.net>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 1ed7475de454..25ba2765d27d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -2240,6 +2240,7 @@ static int eb_move_to_gpu(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 		struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
 		unsigned int flags = ev->flags;
 		struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj = vma->obj;
+		bool async, write;
 
 		assert_vma_held(vma);
 
@@ -2271,7 +2272,10 @@ static int eb_move_to_gpu(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
 				flags &= ~EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC;
 		}
 
-		if (err == 0 && !(flags & EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC)) {
+		async = flags & EXEC_OBJECT_ASYNC;
+		write = flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE;
+
+		if (err == 0 && (!async || write)) {
 			err = i915_request_await_object
 				(eb->request, obj, flags & EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE);
 		}
-- 
2.32.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-05 10:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 122+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-05 10:46 [PATCH v5 00/20] drm/sched dependency handling and implicit sync fixes Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 01/20] drm/sched: Split drm_sched_job_init Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:43   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:43     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 14:07     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 14:07       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 14:47       ` Christian König
2021-08-05 14:47         ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 15:07         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 15:07           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-17  8:49   ` [PATCH] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-17  8:49     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 02/20] drm/msm: Fix drm/sched point of no return rules Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 23:02   ` Rob Clark
2021-08-05 23:02     ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-06 16:41     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 16:41       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 17:19       ` Rob Clark
2021-08-06 17:19         ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-06 18:41         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 18:41           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 19:01           ` Rob Clark
2021-08-06 19:01             ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-06 19:10             ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 19:10               ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-06 19:59               ` Rob Clark
2021-08-06 19:59                 ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-17  8:53   ` [PATCH] drm/msm: Improve " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-17  8:53     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-26  9:33     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-26  9:33       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-26 15:38       ` Rob Clark
2021-08-26 15:38         ` Rob Clark
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 03/20] drm/sched: Barriers are needed for entity->last_scheduled Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:45   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:45     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 04/20] drm/sched: Add dependency tracking Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:47   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:47     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 05/20] drm/sched: drop entity parameter from drm_sched_push_job Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:48   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:48     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 06/20] drm/sched: improve docs around drm_sched_entity Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 07/20] drm/panfrost: use scheduler dependency tracking Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 15:10   ` Alyssa Rosenzweig
2021-08-05 15:10     ` [Intel-gfx] " Alyssa Rosenzweig
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 08/20] drm/lima: " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:28   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:28     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-14  2:45     ` Qiang Yu
2021-08-14  2:45       ` [Intel-gfx] " Qiang Yu
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 09/20] drm/v3d: Move drm_sched_job_init to v3d_job_init Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 10/20] drm/v3d: Use scheduler dependency handling Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 11/20] drm/etnaviv: " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:28   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:28     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 12/20] drm/msm: " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:29   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:29     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-26 16:12   ` Rob Clark
2021-08-26 16:12     ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-30  9:01   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-30  9:01     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 13/20] drm/gem: Delete gem array fencing helpers Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:29   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-12 19:29     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46 ` [PATCH v5 14/20] drm/sched: Don't store self-dependencies Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:46   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:18   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:18     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 13:25     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:25       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:57       ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:57         ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 15:06         ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 15:06           ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` [PATCH v5 15/20] drm/sched: Check locking in drm_sched_job_await_implicit Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:19   ` Christian König
2021-08-05 13:19     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christian König
2021-08-05 13:27     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:27       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` [PATCH v5 16/20] drm/msm: Don't break exclusive fence ordering Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-26 16:16   ` Rob Clark
2021-08-26 16:16     ` [Intel-gfx] " Rob Clark
2021-08-26 16:16     ` Rob Clark
2021-08-30  9:02     ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-30  9:02       ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` [PATCH v5 17/20] drm/etnaviv: " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` [PATCH v5 18/20] drm/i915: delete exclude argument from i915_sw_fence_await_reservation Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` Daniel Vetter [this message]
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 19/20] drm/i915: Don't break exclusive fence ordering Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47 ` [PATCH v5 20/20] dma-resv: Give the docs a do-over Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 10:47   ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-30 19:38   ` Daniel Vetter
2021-08-30 19:38     ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2021-08-05 13:58 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/sched dependency handling and implicit sync fixes Patchwork
2021-08-05 14:29 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2021-08-06 19:14 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for drm/sched dependency handling and implicit sync fixes (rev2) Patchwork
2021-08-17 16:27 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/sched dependency handling and implicit sync fixes (rev4) Patchwork
2021-08-17 16:57 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-08-17 18:15 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-08-26 13:17 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/sched dependency handling and implicit sync fixes (rev5) Patchwork
2021-08-26 13:48 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2021-08-26 21:46 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: 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=20210805104705.862416-20-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --to=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=daniel.vetter@intel.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jason@jlekstrand.net \
    --cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.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.