2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Copyright © 2019 Intel Corporation
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#ifndef _I915_ACTIVE_H_
|
|
|
|
#define _I915_ACTIVE_H_
|
|
|
|
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
#include <linux/lockdep.h>
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "i915_active_types.h"
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "i915_request.h"
|
|
|
|
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
struct i915_request;
|
|
|
|
struct intel_engine_cs;
|
|
|
|
struct intel_timeline;
|
|
|
|
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* We treat requests as fences. This is not be to confused with our
|
|
|
|
* "fence registers" but pipeline synchronisation objects ala GL_ARB_sync.
|
|
|
|
* We use the fences to synchronize access from the CPU with activity on the
|
|
|
|
* GPU, for example, we should not rewrite an object's PTE whilst the GPU
|
|
|
|
* is reading them. We also track fences at a higher level to provide
|
|
|
|
* implicit synchronisation around GEM objects, e.g. set-domain will wait
|
|
|
|
* for outstanding GPU rendering before marking the object ready for CPU
|
|
|
|
* access, or a pageflip will wait until the GPU is complete before showing
|
|
|
|
* the frame on the scanout.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* In order to use a fence, the object must track the fence it needs to
|
|
|
|
* serialise with. For example, GEM objects want to track both read and
|
|
|
|
* write access so that we can perform concurrent read operations between
|
|
|
|
* the CPU and GPU engines, as well as waiting for all rendering to
|
|
|
|
* complete, or waiting for the last GPU user of a "fence register". The
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* object then embeds a #i915_active_fence to track the most recent (in
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* retirement order) request relevant for the desired mode of access.
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* The #i915_active_fence is updated with i915_active_fence_set() to
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* track the most recent fence request, typically this is done as part of
|
|
|
|
* i915_vma_move_to_active().
|
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* When the #i915_active_fence completes (is retired), it will
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* signal its completion to the owner through a callback as well as mark
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* itself as idle (i915_active_fence.request == NULL). The owner
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* can then perform any action, such as delayed freeing of an active
|
|
|
|
* resource including itself.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_active_noop(struct dma_fence *fence, struct dma_fence_cb *cb);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* __i915_active_fence_init - prepares the activity tracker for use
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* @active - the active tracker
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* @fence - initial fence to track, can be NULL
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* @func - a callback when then the tracker is retired (becomes idle),
|
|
|
|
* can be NULL
|
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_init() prepares the embedded @active struct for use as
|
|
|
|
* an activity tracker, that is for tracking the last known active fence
|
|
|
|
* associated with it. When the last fence becomes idle, when it is retired
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* after completion, the optional callback @func is invoked.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
static inline void
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
__i915_active_fence_init(struct i915_active_fence *active,
|
|
|
|
void *fence,
|
|
|
|
dma_fence_func_t fn)
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
RCU_INIT_POINTER(active->fence, fence);
|
|
|
|
active->cb.func = fn ?: i915_active_noop;
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-11-27 21:45:27 +08:00
|
|
|
#define INIT_ACTIVE_FENCE(A) \
|
|
|
|
__i915_active_fence_init((A), NULL, NULL)
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
struct dma_fence *
|
|
|
|
__i915_active_fence_set(struct i915_active_fence *active,
|
|
|
|
struct dma_fence *fence);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_set - updates the tracker to watch the current fence
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* @active - the active tracker
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* @rq - the request to watch
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_set() watches the given @rq for completion. While
|
|
|
|
* that @rq is busy, the @active reports busy. When that @rq is signaled
|
|
|
|
* (or else retired) the @active tracker is updated to report idle.
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
int __must_check
|
|
|
|
i915_active_fence_set(struct i915_active_fence *active,
|
|
|
|
struct i915_request *rq);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
/**
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_get - return a reference to the active fence
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* @active - the active tracker
|
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_get() returns a reference to the active fence,
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* or NULL if the active tracker is idle. The reference is obtained under RCU,
|
|
|
|
* so no locking is required by the caller.
|
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* The reference should be freed with dma_fence_put().
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline struct dma_fence *
|
|
|
|
i915_active_fence_get(struct i915_active_fence *active)
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
struct dma_fence *fence;
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rcu_read_lock();
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
fence = dma_fence_get_rcu_safe(&active->fence);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
rcu_read_unlock();
|
|
|
|
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
return fence;
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/**
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_isset - report whether the active tracker is assigned
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* @active - the active tracker
|
|
|
|
*
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
* i915_active_fence_isset() returns true if the active tracker is currently
|
|
|
|
* assigned to a fence. Due to the lazy retiring, that fence may be idle
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
* and this may report stale information.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
static inline bool
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
i915_active_fence_isset(const struct i915_active_fence *active)
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
return rcu_access_pointer(active->fence);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_gem_active into the i915_active family
Looking forward, we need to break the struct_mutex dependency on
i915_gem_active. In the meantime, external use of i915_gem_active is
quite beguiling, little do new users suspect that it implies a barrier
as each request it tracks must be ordered wrt the previous one. As one
of many, it can be used to track activity across multiple timelines, a
shared fence, which fits our unordered request submission much better. We
need to steer external users away from the singular, exclusive fence
imposed by i915_gem_active to i915_active instead. As part of that
process, we move i915_gem_active out of i915_request.c into
i915_active.c to start separating the two concepts, and rename it to
i915_active_request (both to tie it to the concept of tracking just one
request, and to give it a longer, less appealing name).
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190205130005.2807-5-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-02-05 21:00:05 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* GPU activity tracking
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Each set of commands submitted to the GPU compromises a single request that
|
|
|
|
* signals a fence upon completion. struct i915_request combines the
|
|
|
|
* command submission, scheduling and fence signaling roles. If we want to see
|
|
|
|
* if a particular task is complete, we need to grab the fence (struct
|
|
|
|
* i915_request) for that task and check or wait for it to be signaled. More
|
|
|
|
* often though we want to track the status of a bunch of tasks, for example
|
|
|
|
* to wait for the GPU to finish accessing some memory across a variety of
|
|
|
|
* different command pipelines from different clients. We could choose to
|
|
|
|
* track every single request associated with the task, but knowing that
|
|
|
|
* each request belongs to an ordered timeline (later requests within a
|
|
|
|
* timeline must wait for earlier requests), we need only track the
|
|
|
|
* latest request in each timeline to determine the overall status of the
|
|
|
|
* task.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* struct i915_active provides this tracking across timelines. It builds a
|
|
|
|
* composite shared-fence, and is updated as new work is submitted to the task,
|
|
|
|
* forming a snapshot of the current status. It should be embedded into the
|
|
|
|
* different resources that need to track their associated GPU activity to
|
|
|
|
* provide a callback when that GPU activity has ceased, or otherwise to
|
|
|
|
* provide a serialisation point either for request submission or for CPU
|
|
|
|
* synchronisation.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
void __i915_active_init(struct i915_active *ref,
|
2019-06-22 02:38:00 +08:00
|
|
|
int (*active)(struct i915_active *ref),
|
|
|
|
void (*retire)(struct i915_active *ref),
|
2019-12-02 22:01:32 +08:00
|
|
|
struct lock_class_key *mkey,
|
|
|
|
struct lock_class_key *wkey);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Specialise each class of i915_active to avoid impossible lockdep cycles. */
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
#define i915_active_init(ref, active, retire) do { \
|
2019-12-02 22:01:32 +08:00
|
|
|
static struct lock_class_key __mkey; \
|
|
|
|
static struct lock_class_key __wkey; \
|
2019-06-22 02:38:00 +08:00
|
|
|
\
|
2019-12-02 22:01:32 +08:00
|
|
|
__i915_active_init(ref, active, retire, &__mkey, &__wkey); \
|
2019-06-22 02:38:00 +08:00
|
|
|
} while (0)
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
int i915_active_ref(struct i915_active *ref,
|
2019-08-16 20:10:00 +08:00
|
|
|
struct intel_timeline *tl,
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
struct dma_fence *fence);
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
|
drm/i915: Mark i915_request.timeline as a volatile, rcu pointer
The request->timeline is only valid until the request is retired (i.e.
before it is completed). Upon retiring the request, the context may be
unpinned and freed, and along with it the timeline may be freed. We
therefore need to be very careful when chasing rq->timeline that the
pointer does not disappear beneath us. The vast majority of users are in
a protected context, either during request construction or retirement,
where the timeline->mutex is held and the timeline cannot disappear. It
is those few off the beaten path (where we access a second timeline) that
need extra scrutiny -- to be added in the next patch after first adding
the warnings about dangerous access.
One complication, where we cannot use the timeline->mutex itself, is
during request submission onto hardware (under spinlocks). Here, we want
to check on the timeline to finalize the breadcrumb, and so we need to
impose a second rule to ensure that the request->timeline is indeed
valid. As we are submitting the request, it's context and timeline must
be pinned, as it will be used by the hardware. Since it is pinned, we
know the request->timeline must still be valid, and we cannot submit the
idle barrier until after we release the engine->active.lock, ergo while
submitting and holding that spinlock, a second thread cannot release the
timeline.
v2: Don't be lazy inside selftests; hold the timeline->mutex for as long
as we need it, and tidy up acquiring the timeline with a bit of
refactoring (i915_active_add_request)
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190919111912.21631-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-09-19 19:19:10 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline int
|
|
|
|
i915_active_add_request(struct i915_active *ref, struct i915_request *rq)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
return i915_active_ref(ref, i915_request_timeline(rq), &rq->fence);
|
drm/i915: Mark i915_request.timeline as a volatile, rcu pointer
The request->timeline is only valid until the request is retired (i.e.
before it is completed). Upon retiring the request, the context may be
unpinned and freed, and along with it the timeline may be freed. We
therefore need to be very careful when chasing rq->timeline that the
pointer does not disappear beneath us. The vast majority of users are in
a protected context, either during request construction or retirement,
where the timeline->mutex is held and the timeline cannot disappear. It
is those few off the beaten path (where we access a second timeline) that
need extra scrutiny -- to be added in the next patch after first adding
the warnings about dangerous access.
One complication, where we cannot use the timeline->mutex itself, is
during request submission onto hardware (under spinlocks). Here, we want
to check on the timeline to finalize the breadcrumb, and so we need to
impose a second rule to ensure that the request->timeline is indeed
valid. As we are submitting the request, it's context and timeline must
be pinned, as it will be used by the hardware. Since it is pinned, we
know the request->timeline must still be valid, and we cannot submit the
idle barrier until after we release the engine->active.lock, ergo while
submitting and holding that spinlock, a second thread cannot release the
timeline.
v2: Don't be lazy inside selftests; hold the timeline->mutex for as long
as we need it, and tidy up acquiring the timeline with a bit of
refactoring (i915_active_add_request)
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190919111912.21631-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-09-19 19:19:10 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2020-01-31 02:17:10 +08:00
|
|
|
struct dma_fence *
|
|
|
|
i915_active_set_exclusive(struct i915_active *ref, struct dma_fence *f);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_vma_pin under the vm->mutex
Replace the struct_mutex requirement for pinning the i915_vma with the
local vm->mutex instead. Note that the vm->mutex is tainted by the
shrinker (we require unbinding from inside fs-reclaim) and so we cannot
allocate while holding that mutex. Instead we have to preallocate
workers to do allocate and apply the PTE updates after we have we
reserved their slot in the drm_mm (using fences to order the PTE writes
with the GPU work and with later unbind).
In adding the asynchronous vma binding, one subtle requirement is to
avoid coupling the binding fence into the backing object->resv. That is
the asynchronous binding only applies to the vma timeline itself and not
to the pages as that is a more global timeline (the binding of one vma
does not need to be ordered with another vma, nor does the implicit GEM
fencing depend on a vma, only on writes to the backing store). Keeping
the vma binding distinct from the backing store timelines is verified by
a number of async gem_exec_fence and gem_exec_schedule tests. The way we
do this is quite simple, we keep the fence for the vma binding separate
and only wait on it as required, and never add it to the obj->resv
itself.
Another consequence in reducing the locking around the vma is the
destruction of the vma is no longer globally serialised by struct_mutex.
A natural solution would be to add a kref to i915_vma, but that requires
decoupling the reference cycles, possibly by introducing a new
i915_mm_pages object that is own by both obj->mm and vma->pages.
However, we have not taken that route due to the overshadowing lmem/ttm
discussions, and instead play a series of complicated games with
trylocks to (hopefully) ensure that only one destruction path is called!
v2: Add some commentary, and some helpers to reduce patch churn.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191004134015.13204-4-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-10-04 21:39:58 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static inline bool i915_active_has_exclusive(struct i915_active *ref)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
return rcu_access_pointer(ref->excl.fence);
|
drm/i915: Pull i915_vma_pin under the vm->mutex
Replace the struct_mutex requirement for pinning the i915_vma with the
local vm->mutex instead. Note that the vm->mutex is tainted by the
shrinker (we require unbinding from inside fs-reclaim) and so we cannot
allocate while holding that mutex. Instead we have to preallocate
workers to do allocate and apply the PTE updates after we have we
reserved their slot in the drm_mm (using fences to order the PTE writes
with the GPU work and with later unbind).
In adding the asynchronous vma binding, one subtle requirement is to
avoid coupling the binding fence into the backing object->resv. That is
the asynchronous binding only applies to the vma timeline itself and not
to the pages as that is a more global timeline (the binding of one vma
does not need to be ordered with another vma, nor does the implicit GEM
fencing depend on a vma, only on writes to the backing store). Keeping
the vma binding distinct from the backing store timelines is verified by
a number of async gem_exec_fence and gem_exec_schedule tests. The way we
do this is quite simple, we keep the fence for the vma binding separate
and only wait on it as required, and never add it to the obj->resv
itself.
Another consequence in reducing the locking around the vma is the
destruction of the vma is no longer globally serialised by struct_mutex.
A natural solution would be to add a kref to i915_vma, but that requires
decoupling the reference cycles, possibly by introducing a new
i915_mm_pages object that is own by both obj->mm and vma->pages.
However, we have not taken that route due to the overshadowing lmem/ttm
discussions, and instead play a series of complicated games with
trylocks to (hopefully) ensure that only one destruction path is called!
v2: Add some commentary, and some helpers to reduce patch churn.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20191004134015.13204-4-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-10-04 21:39:58 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2020-03-27 19:22:10 +08:00
|
|
|
int __i915_active_wait(struct i915_active *ref, int state);
|
|
|
|
static inline int i915_active_wait(struct i915_active *ref)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return __i915_active_wait(ref, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2020-03-11 17:20:44 +08:00
|
|
|
int i915_sw_fence_await_active(struct i915_sw_fence *fence,
|
|
|
|
struct i915_active *ref,
|
|
|
|
unsigned int flags);
|
|
|
|
int i915_request_await_active(struct i915_request *rq,
|
|
|
|
struct i915_active *ref,
|
|
|
|
unsigned int flags);
|
2020-04-06 23:58:38 +08:00
|
|
|
#define I915_ACTIVE_AWAIT_EXCL BIT(0)
|
|
|
|
#define I915_ACTIVE_AWAIT_ACTIVE BIT(1)
|
2020-04-06 23:58:39 +08:00
|
|
|
#define I915_ACTIVE_AWAIT_BARRIER BIT(2)
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2019-06-22 02:38:00 +08:00
|
|
|
int i915_active_acquire(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-10-04 21:40:00 +08:00
|
|
|
bool i915_active_acquire_if_busy(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_active_release(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-07-26 06:38:43 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2020-01-27 23:28:29 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline void __i915_active_acquire(struct i915_active *ref)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
GEM_BUG_ON(!atomic_read(&ref->count));
|
|
|
|
atomic_inc(&ref->count);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
static inline bool
|
|
|
|
i915_active_is_idle(const struct i915_active *ref)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2019-06-22 02:38:00 +08:00
|
|
|
return !atomic_read(&ref->count);
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-05 21:00:03 +08:00
|
|
|
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DRM_I915_DEBUG_GEM)
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_active_fini(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-02-05 21:00:03 +08:00
|
|
|
#else
|
|
|
|
static inline void i915_active_fini(struct i915_active *ref) { }
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
|
drm/i915: Keep contexts pinned until after the next kernel context switch
We need to keep the context image pinned in memory until after the GPU
has finished writing into it. Since it continues to write as we signal
the final breadcrumb, we need to keep it pinned until the request after
it is complete. Currently we know the order in which requests execute on
each engine, and so to remove that presumption we need to identify a
request/context-switch we know must occur after our completion. Any
request queued after the signal must imply a context switch, for
simplicity we use a fresh request from the kernel context.
The sequence of operations for keeping the context pinned until saved is:
- On context activation, we preallocate a node for each physical engine
the context may operate on. This is to avoid allocations during
unpinning, which may be from inside FS_RECLAIM context (aka the
shrinker)
- On context deactivation on retirement of the last active request (which
is before we know the context has been saved), we add the
preallocated node onto a barrier list on each engine
- On engine idling, we emit a switch to kernel context. When this
switch completes, we know that all previous contexts must have been
saved, and so on retiring this request we can finally unpin all the
contexts that were marked as deactivated prior to the switch.
We can enhance this in future by flushing all the idle contexts on a
regular heartbeat pulse of a switch to kernel context, which will also
be used to check for hung engines.
v2: intel_context_active_acquire/_release
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190614164606.15633-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-06-15 00:46:04 +08:00
|
|
|
int i915_active_acquire_preallocate_barrier(struct i915_active *ref,
|
|
|
|
struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
|
|
|
|
void i915_active_acquire_barrier(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-08-02 18:00:15 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_request_add_active_barriers(struct i915_request *rq);
|
drm/i915: Keep contexts pinned until after the next kernel context switch
We need to keep the context image pinned in memory until after the GPU
has finished writing into it. Since it continues to write as we signal
the final breadcrumb, we need to keep it pinned until the request after
it is complete. Currently we know the order in which requests execute on
each engine, and so to remove that presumption we need to identify a
request/context-switch we know must occur after our completion. Any
request queued after the signal must imply a context switch, for
simplicity we use a fresh request from the kernel context.
The sequence of operations for keeping the context pinned until saved is:
- On context activation, we preallocate a node for each physical engine
the context may operate on. This is to avoid allocations during
unpinning, which may be from inside FS_RECLAIM context (aka the
shrinker)
- On context deactivation on retirement of the last active request (which
is before we know the context has been saved), we add the
preallocated node onto a barrier list on each engine
- On engine idling, we emit a switch to kernel context. When this
switch completes, we know that all previous contexts must have been
saved, and so on retiring this request we can finally unpin all the
contexts that were marked as deactivated prior to the switch.
We can enhance this in future by flushing all the idle contexts on a
regular heartbeat pulse of a switch to kernel context, which will also
be used to check for hung engines.
v2: intel_context_active_acquire/_release
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20190614164606.15633-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
2019-06-15 00:46:04 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2019-10-31 18:11:16 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_active_print(struct i915_active *ref, struct drm_printer *m);
|
2019-11-02 02:10:22 +08:00
|
|
|
void i915_active_unlock_wait(struct i915_active *ref);
|
2019-10-31 18:11:16 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2020-03-27 19:22:11 +08:00
|
|
|
struct i915_active *i915_active_create(void);
|
|
|
|
struct i915_active *i915_active_get(struct i915_active *ref);
|
|
|
|
void i915_active_put(struct i915_active *ref);
|
|
|
|
|
2019-02-05 21:00:02 +08:00
|
|
|
#endif /* _I915_ACTIVE_H_ */
|