From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: "David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
"Tvrtko Ursulin" <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/6] drm/i915: reduce TLB performance regressions
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 14:08:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YuJ8K7W50VeHNAGX@alfio.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1658924372.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
Hi Mauro,
Pushed in drm-intel-gt-next.
Thanks,
Andi
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 02:29:50PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Doing TLB invalidation cause performance regressions, like:
> [424.370996] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* rcs0 TLB invalidation did not complete in 4ms!
>
> As reported at:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6424
>
> as this is an expensive operation. So, reduce the need of it by:
> - checking if the engine is awake;
> - checking if the engine is not wedged;
> - batching operations.
>
> Additionally, add a workaround for a known hardware issue on some GPUs.
>
> In order to double-check that this series won't be introducing any regressions,
> I used this new IGT test:
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/495684/?series=106757&rev=1
>
> Checking the results for 3 different patchsets, on Broadwell:
>
> 1) On the top of drm-tip (2022y-07m-14d-08h-35m-36) - e. g. with TLB
> invalidation and serialization patches:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.490s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.484s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.527s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.506s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.165s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.177s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
>
> 2) With the new version of the batch TLB invalidation patches from this series:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.483s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.495s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.545s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.508s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.169s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.174s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.176s)
>
> 3) Changing the TLB invalidation routine to do nothing[1]:
>
> $ sudo ~/freedesktop-igt/build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 3 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 89 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 256 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 845 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1138 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1359 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1794 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 2139 tries!
> Dynamic subtest smem0 failed.
> **** DEBUG ****
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: 2M hole:200000 contains poison:6b6b6b6b
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Running writer for 200000 at 300000 on bcs0
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Closing hole:200000 on rcs0, sample:deadbeef
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Rechecking hole:200000, sample:6b6b6b6b
> **** END ****
> Subtest close-clear: FAIL (10.434s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.479s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.512s)
>
> In summary, the test does properly detect fail when TLB cache invalidation doesn't happen,
> as shown at result (3). It also shows that both current drm-tip and drm-tip with this series
> applied don't have TLB invalidation cache issues.
>
> [1] I applied this patch on the top of drm-tip:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> index 68c2b0d8f187..0aefcd7be5e9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> @@ -930,0 +931,3 @@ void intel_gt_invalidate_tlbs(struct intel_gt *gt)
> + // HACK: don't do TLB invalidations!!!
> + return;
> +
>
> Regards,
> Mauro
>
> Chris Wilson (4):
> drm/i915/gt: Ignore TLB invalidations on idle engines
> drm/i915/gt: Invalidate TLB of the OA unit at TLB invalidations
> drm/i915/gt: Skip TLB invalidations once wedged
> drm/i915/gt: Batch TLB invalidations
>
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab (2):
> drm/i915/gt: document with_intel_gt_pm_if_awake()
> drm/i915/gt: describe the new tlb parameter at i915_vma_resource
>
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h | 3 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c | 25 +++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 77 +++++++++++++++----
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h | 12 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm.h | 11 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 18 ++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ppgtt.c | 8 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c | 33 ++++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.c | 9 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.h | 6 +-
> 11 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.36.1
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: "Tvrtko Ursulin" <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/6] drm/i915: reduce TLB performance regressions
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 14:08:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YuJ8K7W50VeHNAGX@alfio.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1658924372.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
Hi Mauro,
Pushed in drm-intel-gt-next.
Thanks,
Andi
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 02:29:50PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Doing TLB invalidation cause performance regressions, like:
> [424.370996] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* rcs0 TLB invalidation did not complete in 4ms!
>
> As reported at:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6424
>
> as this is an expensive operation. So, reduce the need of it by:
> - checking if the engine is awake;
> - checking if the engine is not wedged;
> - batching operations.
>
> Additionally, add a workaround for a known hardware issue on some GPUs.
>
> In order to double-check that this series won't be introducing any regressions,
> I used this new IGT test:
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/495684/?series=106757&rev=1
>
> Checking the results for 3 different patchsets, on Broadwell:
>
> 1) On the top of drm-tip (2022y-07m-14d-08h-35m-36) - e. g. with TLB
> invalidation and serialization patches:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.490s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.484s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.527s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.506s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.165s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.177s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
>
> 2) With the new version of the batch TLB invalidation patches from this series:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.483s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.495s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.545s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.508s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.169s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.174s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.176s)
>
> 3) Changing the TLB invalidation routine to do nothing[1]:
>
> $ sudo ~/freedesktop-igt/build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 3 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 89 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 256 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 845 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1138 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1359 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1794 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 2139 tries!
> Dynamic subtest smem0 failed.
> **** DEBUG ****
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: 2M hole:200000 contains poison:6b6b6b6b
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Running writer for 200000 at 300000 on bcs0
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Closing hole:200000 on rcs0, sample:deadbeef
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Rechecking hole:200000, sample:6b6b6b6b
> **** END ****
> Subtest close-clear: FAIL (10.434s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.479s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.512s)
>
> In summary, the test does properly detect fail when TLB cache invalidation doesn't happen,
> as shown at result (3). It also shows that both current drm-tip and drm-tip with this series
> applied don't have TLB invalidation cache issues.
>
> [1] I applied this patch on the top of drm-tip:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> index 68c2b0d8f187..0aefcd7be5e9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> @@ -930,0 +931,3 @@ void intel_gt_invalidate_tlbs(struct intel_gt *gt)
> + // HACK: don't do TLB invalidations!!!
> + return;
> +
>
> Regards,
> Mauro
>
> Chris Wilson (4):
> drm/i915/gt: Ignore TLB invalidations on idle engines
> drm/i915/gt: Invalidate TLB of the OA unit at TLB invalidations
> drm/i915/gt: Skip TLB invalidations once wedged
> drm/i915/gt: Batch TLB invalidations
>
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab (2):
> drm/i915/gt: document with_intel_gt_pm_if_awake()
> drm/i915/gt: describe the new tlb parameter at i915_vma_resource
>
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h | 3 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c | 25 +++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 77 +++++++++++++++----
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h | 12 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm.h | 11 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 18 ++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ppgtt.c | 8 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c | 33 ++++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.c | 9 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.h | 6 +-
> 11 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.36.1
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: "David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org,
"Sumit Semwal" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/6] drm/i915: reduce TLB performance regressions
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 14:08:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YuJ8K7W50VeHNAGX@alfio.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1658924372.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
Hi Mauro,
Pushed in drm-intel-gt-next.
Thanks,
Andi
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 02:29:50PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Doing TLB invalidation cause performance regressions, like:
> [424.370996] i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* rcs0 TLB invalidation did not complete in 4ms!
>
> As reported at:
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6424
>
> as this is an expensive operation. So, reduce the need of it by:
> - checking if the engine is awake;
> - checking if the engine is not wedged;
> - batching operations.
>
> Additionally, add a workaround for a known hardware issue on some GPUs.
>
> In order to double-check that this series won't be introducing any regressions,
> I used this new IGT test:
>
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/495684/?series=106757&rev=1
>
> Checking the results for 3 different patchsets, on Broadwell:
>
> 1) On the top of drm-tip (2022y-07m-14d-08h-35m-36) - e. g. with TLB
> invalidation and serialization patches:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.490s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.484s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.527s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.506s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.165s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.177s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
>
> 2) With the new version of the batch TLB invalidation patches from this series:
>
> $ sudo build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> Subtest close-clear: SUCCESS (10.483s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.495s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.545s)
> Subtest u-shrink-clear: SUCCESS (10.508s)
> Subtest close-dumb: SUCCESS (10.172s)
> Subtest madv-dumb: SUCCESS (10.169s)
> Subtest u-unmap-dumb: SUCCESS (10.174s)
> Subtest u-shrink-dumb: SUCCESS (10.176s)
>
> 3) Changing the TLB invalidation routine to do nothing[1]:
>
> $ sudo ~/freedesktop-igt/build/tests/gem_exec_tlb|grep Subtest
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1958) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 3 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1956) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 89 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1957) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 256 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1960) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 845 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1961) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1138 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1954) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1359 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1955) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 1794 tries!
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Test assertion failure function check_bo, file ../tests/i915/gem_exec_tlb.c:384:
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: !sq
> (gem_exec_tlb:1959) CRITICAL: Found deadbeef in a new (clear) buffer after 2139 tries!
> Dynamic subtest smem0 failed.
> **** DEBUG ****
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: 2M hole:200000 contains poison:6b6b6b6b
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Running writer for 200000 at 300000 on bcs0
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Closing hole:200000 on rcs0, sample:deadbeef
> (gem_exec_tlb:1944) DEBUG: Rechecking hole:200000, sample:6b6b6b6b
> **** END ****
> Subtest close-clear: FAIL (10.434s)
> Subtest madv-clear: SUCCESS (10.479s)
> Subtest u-unmap-clear: SUCCESS (10.512s)
>
> In summary, the test does properly detect fail when TLB cache invalidation doesn't happen,
> as shown at result (3). It also shows that both current drm-tip and drm-tip with this series
> applied don't have TLB invalidation cache issues.
>
> [1] I applied this patch on the top of drm-tip:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> index 68c2b0d8f187..0aefcd7be5e9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c
> @@ -930,0 +931,3 @@ void intel_gt_invalidate_tlbs(struct intel_gt *gt)
> + // HACK: don't do TLB invalidations!!!
> + return;
> +
>
> Regards,
> Mauro
>
> Chris Wilson (4):
> drm/i915/gt: Ignore TLB invalidations on idle engines
> drm/i915/gt: Invalidate TLB of the OA unit at TLB invalidations
> drm/i915/gt: Skip TLB invalidations once wedged
> drm/i915/gt: Batch TLB invalidations
>
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab (2):
> drm/i915/gt: document with_intel_gt_pm_if_awake()
> drm/i915/gt: describe the new tlb parameter at i915_vma_resource
>
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_object_types.h | 3 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_pages.c | 25 +++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.c | 77 +++++++++++++++----
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt.h | 12 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_pm.h | 11 +++
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h | 18 ++++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_ppgtt.c | 8 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.c | 33 ++++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.c | 9 ++-
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_vma_resource.h | 6 +-
> 11 files changed, 163 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.36.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-28 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-27 12:29 [PATCH v3 0/6] drm/i915: reduce TLB performance regressions Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] drm/i915/gt: Ignore TLB invalidations on idle engines Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] drm/i915/gt: document with_intel_gt_pm_if_awake() Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 14:18 ` [Intel-gfx] " Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 14:18 ` Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] drm/i915/gt: Invalidate TLB of the OA unit at TLB invalidations Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] drm/i915/gt: Skip TLB invalidations once wedged Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] drm/i915/gt: Batch TLB invalidations Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 14:25 ` Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 14:25 ` [Intel-gfx] " Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 14:25 ` Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] drm/i915/gt: describe the new tlb parameter at i915_vma_resource Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 12:29 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-27 14:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Andi Shyti
2022-07-27 13:12 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: reduce TLB performance regressions Patchwork
2022-07-27 13:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-07-27 15:52 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-07-28 12:08 ` Andi Shyti [this message]
2022-07-28 12:08 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 0/6] " Andi Shyti
2022-07-28 12:08 ` Andi Shyti
2022-07-28 12:34 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2022-07-28 12:34 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
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=YuJ8K7W50VeHNAGX@alfio.lan \
--to=andi.shyti@linux.intel.com \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@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.