* [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step
@ 2021-06-15 11:36 Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Hellström @ 2021-06-15 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: intel-gfx, dri-devel; +Cc: Thomas Hellström, matthew.auld
To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're
processing, perform locking as a separate step.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
---
.../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 201fed19d120..394eb40c95b5 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -922,21 +922,38 @@ static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
return err;
}
-static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
+static int eb_lock_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
{
unsigned int i;
int err;
- INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
-
for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
- struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
err = i915_gem_object_lock(vma->obj, &eb->ww);
if (err)
return err;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int err;
+
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
+
+ err = eb_lock_vmas(eb);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
+ struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
+ struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
+ struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
err = eb_pin_vma(eb, entry, ev);
if (err == -EDEADLK)
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step
2021-06-15 11:36 [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step Thomas Hellström
@ 2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
2021-06-17 10:07 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 10:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-06-17 15:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tang, CQ
2 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ramalingam C @ 2021-06-17 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Hellström; +Cc: intel-gfx, matthew.auld, dri-devel
On 2021-06-15 at 13:36:00 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote:
> To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're
> processing, perform locking as a separate step.
>
Looks reasonable to me.
Reviewed-by: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index 201fed19d120..394eb40c95b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -922,21 +922,38 @@ static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> return err;
> }
>
> -static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +static int eb_lock_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> unsigned int i;
> int err;
>
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> -
> for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = i915_gem_object_lock(vma->obj, &eb->ww);
> if (err)
> return err;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +{
> + unsigned int i;
> + int err;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> +
> + err = eb_lock_vmas(eb);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> + struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> + struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> + struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = eb_pin_vma(eb, entry, ev);
> if (err == -EDEADLK)
> --
> 2.31.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step
2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
@ 2021-06-17 10:07 ` Thomas Hellström
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Hellström @ 2021-06-17 10:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramalingam C; +Cc: intel-gfx, matthew.auld, dri-devel
On 6/17/21 11:56 AM, Ramalingam C wrote:
> On 2021-06-15 at 13:36:00 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote:
>> To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're
>> processing, perform locking as a separate step.
>>
> Looks reasonable to me.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
>
>
Thanks for reviewing!
/Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step
2021-06-15 11:36 [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
@ 2021-06-17 10:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-06-17 15:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tang, CQ
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Maarten Lankhorst @ 2021-06-17 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel; +Cc: matthew.auld
Op 15-06-2021 om 13:36 schreef Thomas Hellström:
> To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're
> processing, perform locking as a separate step.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index 201fed19d120..394eb40c95b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -922,21 +922,38 @@ static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> return err;
> }
>
> -static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +static int eb_lock_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> unsigned int i;
> int err;
>
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> -
> for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = i915_gem_object_lock(vma->obj, &eb->ww);
> if (err)
> return err;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +{
> + unsigned int i;
> + int err;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> +
> + err = eb_lock_vmas(eb);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> + struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> + struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> + struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = eb_pin_vma(eb, entry, ev);
> if (err == -EDEADLK)
Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* RE: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step
2021-06-15 11:36 [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
2021-06-17 10:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
@ 2021-06-17 15:35 ` Tang, CQ
2 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tang, CQ @ 2021-06-17 15:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Hellström, intel-gfx, dri-devel; +Cc: Auld, Matthew
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of
> Thomas Hellström
> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 4:36 AM
> To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>; Auld, Matthew
> <matthew.auld@intel.com>
> Subject: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a
> separate step
>
> To help avoid evicting already resident buffers from the batch we're
> processing, perform locking as a separate step.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++--
> -
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> index 201fed19d120..394eb40c95b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
> @@ -922,21 +922,38 @@ static int eb_lookup_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer
> *eb)
> return err;
> }
>
> -static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> +static int eb_lock_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb)
> {
> unsigned int i;
> int err;
>
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> -
> for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = i915_gem_object_lock(vma->obj, &eb->ww);
> if (err)
> return err;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int eb_validate_vmas(struct i915_execbuffer *eb) {
> + unsigned int i;
> + int err;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&eb->unbound);
> +
> + err = eb_lock_vmas(eb);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < eb->buffer_count; i++) {
> + struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 *entry = &eb->exec[i];
> + struct eb_vma *ev = &eb->vma[i];
> + struct i915_vma *vma = ev->vma;
>
> err = eb_pin_vma(eb, entry, ev);
> if (err == -EDEADLK)
Thomas, just checked eb_pin_vma(), it calls i915_vma_pin_ww(), if the object is already locked, under what condition these calls still return -EDEADLK?
--CQ
> --
> 2.31.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-06-17 15:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-06-15 11:36 [PATCH] drm/i915: Perform execbuffer object locking as a separate step Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 9:56 ` Ramalingam C
2021-06-17 10:07 ` Thomas Hellström
2021-06-17 10:19 ` Maarten Lankhorst
2021-06-17 15:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tang, CQ
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).