Am 12.01.20 um 02:25 schrieb Nirmoy Das:
This patch adds required fields to drm_sched_job and drm_gpu_scheduler
structure to cumulatively calculate amount of time a drm_gpu_scheduler
spend on serving a job.

Using least used drm scheduler to choose a run queue
improves drm_sched_entity_get_free_sched()'s job distribution

Below are test results after running amdgpu_test from mesa drm

Before this patch:

sched_name     num of many times it got scheduled
=========      ==================================
sdma0          314
sdma1          32
comp_1.0.0     56

After this patch:

sched_name     num of many times it got scheduled
=========      ==================================
sdma0          113
sdma1          383
comp_1.0.0     9
comp_1.0.1     9
comp_1.1.0     8
comp_1.1.1     8
comp_1.2.0    12
comp_1.2.1    13
comp_1.3.0    16
comp_1.3.1    9

Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <[email protected]>

Well that is a nice start, but a couple of comments below.

---
  drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c | 9 +++++----
  drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c   | 2 ++
  include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h              | 2 ++
  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c 
b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c
index 2e3a058fc239..b5555af787d0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_entity.c
@@ -130,7 +130,7 @@ static struct drm_sched_rq *
  drm_sched_entity_get_free_sched(struct drm_sched_entity *entity)
  {
        struct drm_sched_rq *rq = NULL;
-       unsigned int min_jobs = UINT_MAX, num_jobs;
+       uint64_t min_time_consumed = -1, total_consumed_time;
        int i;
for (i = 0; i < entity->num_sched_list; ++i) {
@@ -141,9 +141,9 @@ drm_sched_entity_get_free_sched(struct drm_sched_entity 
*entity)
                        continue;
                }
- num_jobs = atomic_read(&sched->num_jobs);
-               if (num_jobs < min_jobs) {
-                       min_jobs = num_jobs;
+               total_consumed_time = sched->total_consumed_time;
+               if (total_consumed_time < min_time_consumed) {
+                       min_time_consumed = total_consumed_time;
                        rq = &entity->sched_list[i]->sched_rq[entity->priority];

You might want to remove num_jobs now completely since it unused, but consider the whole algorithm first. See below for that.

                }
        }
@@ -499,6 +499,7 @@ void drm_sched_entity_push_job(struct drm_sched_job 
*sched_job,
trace_drm_sched_job(sched_job, entity);
        atomic_inc(&entity->rq->sched->num_jobs);
+       sched_job->start_time = ktime_get_ns();
        WRITE_ONCE(entity->last_user, current->group_leader);
        first = spsc_queue_push(&entity->job_queue, &sched_job->queue_node);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
index 3fad5876a13f..67fdf4f248d4 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
@@ -653,6 +653,7 @@ static void drm_sched_process_job(struct dma_fence *f, 
struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
        struct drm_sched_job *s_job = container_of(cb, struct drm_sched_job, 
cb);
        struct drm_sched_fence *s_fence = s_job->s_fence;
        struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched = s_fence->sched;
+       uint64_t end = ktime_get_ns();
atomic_dec(&sched->hw_rq_count);
        atomic_dec(&sched->num_jobs);
@@ -660,6 +661,7 @@ static void drm_sched_process_job(struct dma_fence *f, 
struct dma_fence_cb *cb)
        trace_drm_sched_process_job(s_fence);
drm_sched_fence_finished(s_fence);
+       s_job->sched->total_consumed_time += end - s_job->start_time;

Don't use s_job->sched here, use the local variable sched (s_job might already be destroyed).

The next problem is that you somehow need to protect total_consumed_time from concurrent updates, a 64bit atomic should probably do it.

Another problem from the algorithm point of view is that the total_time_consumed of each scheduler doesn't necessary say anything about a good scheduling decision for the future.

For example there could have been a lot of work from a single queue to SDMA0 in the past, but now both SDMA0 and SDMA1 are idle.

Scheduling everything to SDMA1 until we catch up with SDMA0 is certainly not a good idea. Since this counters the whole idea of load balancing.

Regards,
Christian.

        wake_up_interruptible(&sched->wake_up_worker);
  }
diff --git a/include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h b/include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h
index 96a1a1b7526e..496d9b209d12 100644
--- a/include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h
+++ b/include/drm/gpu_scheduler.h
@@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ struct drm_sched_job {
        struct dma_fence_cb             finish_cb;
        struct list_head                node;
        uint64_t                        id;
+       uint64_t                        start_time;
        atomic_t                        karma;
        enum drm_sched_priority         s_priority;
        struct drm_sched_entity  *entity;
@@ -285,6 +286,7 @@ struct drm_gpu_scheduler {
        atomic_t                        num_jobs;
        bool                    ready;
        bool                            free_guilty;
+       uint64_t                        total_consumed_time;
  };
int drm_sched_init(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,

_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx

Reply via email to