Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 4/9] drm/scheduler: Add fence deadline support | From | Christian König <> | Date | Tue, 21 Sep 2021 18:45:24 +0200 |
| |
Am 21.09.21 um 18:35 schrieb Rob Clark: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 8:57 AM Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 10:45 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 11:47:55AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote: >>>> From: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> >>>> >>>> As the finished fence is the one that is exposed to userspace, and >>>> therefore the one that other operations, like atomic update, would >>>> block on, we need to propagate the deadline from from the finished >>>> fence to the actual hw fence. >>>> >>>> v2: Split into drm_sched_fence_set_parent() (ckoenig) >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 2 +- >>>> include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h | 8 ++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c >>>> index bcea035cf4c6..4fc41a71d1c7 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c >>>> @@ -128,6 +128,30 @@ static void drm_sched_fence_release_finished(struct dma_fence *f) >>>> dma_fence_put(&fence->scheduled); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +static void drm_sched_fence_set_deadline_finished(struct dma_fence *f, >>>> + ktime_t deadline) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct drm_sched_fence *fence = to_drm_sched_fence(f); >>>> + unsigned long flags; >>>> + >>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&fence->lock, flags); >>>> + >>>> + /* If we already have an earlier deadline, keep it: */ >>>> + if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_HAS_DEADLINE_BIT, &f->flags) && >>>> + ktime_before(fence->deadline, deadline)) { >>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fence->lock, flags); >>>> + return; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + fence->deadline = deadline; >>>> + set_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_HAS_DEADLINE_BIT, &f->flags); >>>> + >>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fence->lock, flags); >>>> + >>>> + if (fence->parent) >>>> + dma_fence_set_deadline(fence->parent, deadline); >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> static const struct dma_fence_ops drm_sched_fence_ops_scheduled = { >>>> .get_driver_name = drm_sched_fence_get_driver_name, >>>> .get_timeline_name = drm_sched_fence_get_timeline_name, >>>> @@ -138,6 +162,7 @@ static const struct dma_fence_ops drm_sched_fence_ops_finished = { >>>> .get_driver_name = drm_sched_fence_get_driver_name, >>>> .get_timeline_name = drm_sched_fence_get_timeline_name, >>>> .release = drm_sched_fence_release_finished, >>>> + .set_deadline = drm_sched_fence_set_deadline_finished, >>>> }; >>>> >>>> struct drm_sched_fence *to_drm_sched_fence(struct dma_fence *f) >>>> @@ -152,6 +177,15 @@ struct drm_sched_fence *to_drm_sched_fence(struct dma_fence *f) >>>> } >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(to_drm_sched_fence); >>>> >>>> +void drm_sched_fence_set_parent(struct drm_sched_fence *s_fence, >>>> + struct dma_fence *fence) >>>> +{ >>>> + s_fence->parent = dma_fence_get(fence); >>>> + if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_HAS_DEADLINE_BIT, >>>> + &s_fence->finished.flags)) >>> Don't you need the spinlock here too to avoid races? test_bit is very >>> unordered, so guarantees nothing. Spinlock would need to be both around >>> ->parent = and the test_bit. >>> >>> Entirely aside, but there's discussions going on to preallocate the hw >>> fence somehow. If we do that we could make the deadline forwarding >>> lockless here. Having a spinlock just to set the parent is a bit annoying >>> ... >>> >>> Alternative is that you do this locklessly with barriers and a _lot_ of >>> comments. Would be good to benchmark whether the overhead matters though >>> first. >> So, my thinking is that very few (well no) guarantees are made to the >> fence implementor that their ->set_deadline() is not called multiple >> times, from multiple threads, etc. And no guarantee that a later >> deadline is set after an earlier deadline has been set. It is all up >> to the set_deadline() implementation to deal with these cases. >> >> So that means we just need the appropriate barrier-fu to ensure >> another thread calling drm_sched_fence_set_deadline_finished() sees >> fence->parent set before the test_bit. It could mean that the backend >> implementation sees the same deadline set twice, but that is fine. >> > something like:
Of hand I think that this should work.
Or rather say I can't see anything wrong with that.
Christian.
> > ----- > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c > index 4fc41a71d1c7..7f2af6d1777c 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_fence.c > @@ -132,6 +132,7 @@ static void > drm_sched_fence_set_deadline_finished(struct dma_fence *f, > ktime_t deadline) > { > struct drm_sched_fence *fence = to_drm_sched_fence(f); > + struct dma_fence *parent; > unsigned long flags; > > spin_lock_irqsave(&fence->lock, flags); > @@ -148,8 +149,9 @@ static void > drm_sched_fence_set_deadline_finished(struct dma_fence *f, > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&fence->lock, flags); > > - if (fence->parent) > - dma_fence_set_deadline(fence->parent, deadline); > + parent = smp_load_acquire(&fence->parent); > + if (parent) > + dma_fence_set_deadline(parent, deadline); > } > > static const struct dma_fence_ops drm_sched_fence_ops_scheduled = { > @@ -180,7 +182,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(to_drm_sched_fence); > void drm_sched_fence_set_parent(struct drm_sched_fence *s_fence, > struct dma_fence *fence) > { > - s_fence->parent = dma_fence_get(fence); > + smp_store_release(&s_fence->parent, dma_fence_get(fence)); > if (test_bit(DMA_FENCE_FLAG_HAS_DEADLINE_BIT, > &s_fence->finished.flags)) > dma_fence_set_deadline(fence, s_fence->deadline); > ----- > > BR, > -R
| |