On 2018-03-02 01:07 PM, Christian König wrote:
> Am 02.03.2018 um 17:38 schrieb Felix Kuehling:
>> On 2018-03-02 02:43 AM, Christian König wrote:
>>> Hi Felix,
>>> patch #3 looks good to me in general, but why do you need to cache the
>>> pd_phys_addr?
>>> The BO already does that anyway, so you can just use
>>> amdgpu_bo_gpu_addr() for this which also makes some additional checks
>>> on debug builds.
>> Do you mean amdgpu_bo_gpu_offset? That one requires the reservation to
>> be locked unless it's pinned.
> Correct, well that's why I suggested it.
>> We are caching the PD physical address here to get around a tricky
>> circular locking issue we ran into under memory pressure with evictions.
>> I don't remember all the details, but I do remember that the deadlock
>> involved fences, which aren't tracked by the lock dependency checker. So
>> it was particularly tricky to nail down. Avoiding the need to lock the
>> page directory reservation for finding out its physical address breaks
>> the lock cycle.
> OK, so what you do is you get the pd address after you validated the
> BOs and cache it until you need it in the hardware setup?

Correct. There is a KFD-KGD interface that queries the PD address from
the VM. The address gets put into the MAP_PROCESS packet in the HWS
runlist. After that the runlist effectively caches the same address
until an eviction causes a preemption.

> If yes than that would be valid because we do exactly the same in the
> job during command submission.
>>> patch #5 well mixing power management into the VM functions is a clear
>>> NAK.
>> This part won't be in my initial upstream push for GPUVM.
>>> That certainly doesn't belong there, but we can have a counter how
>>> many compute VMs we have in the manager. amdgpu_vm_make_compute() can
>>> then return if this was the first VM to became a compute VM or not.
>> We currently trigger compute power profile switching based on the
>> existence of compute VMs. It was a convenient hook where amdgpu finds
>> out about the existence of compute work. If that's not acceptable we can
>> look into moving it elsewhere, possibly using a new KFD2KGD interface.
> As I said the VM code can still count how many compute VM there are,
> the issue is it should not make power management decisions based on that.
> The caller which triggers the switch of the VM to be a compute VM
> should make that decision.

Makes sense.


> Christian.
>>> The rest of the patch looks good to me.
>> Thanks,
>>    Felix
>>> Regards,
>>> Christian.
>>> Am 01.03.2018 um 23:58 schrieb Felix Kuehling:
>>>> Hi Christian,
>>>> I have a working patch series against amd-kfg-staging that lets KFD
>>>> use
>>>> VMs from render node FDs, as we discussed. There are two patches in
>>>> that
>>>> series that touch amdgpu_vm.[ch] that I'd like your feedback on
>>>> before I
>>>> commit the changes to amd-kfd-staging and include them in my upstream
>>>> patch series for KFD GPUVM support. See attached.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>     Felix

amd-gfx mailing list

Reply via email to