On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:02:06AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
>
> This removes the usage of intel_ring_emit in favour of
> directly writing to the ring buffer.
>
> intel_ring_emit was preventing the compiler for optimising
> fetch and increment of the current ring buffer pointer and
> therefore generating very verbose code for every write.
>
> It had no useful purpose since all ringbuffer operations
> are started and ended with intel_ring_begin and
> intel_ring_advance respectively, with no bail out in the
> middle possible, so it is fine to increment the tail in
> intel_ring_begin and let the code manage the pointer
> itself.
>
> Useless instruction removal amounts to approximately
> two and half kilobytes of saved text on my build.
>
> Not sure if this has any measurable performance
> implications but executing a ton of useless instructions
> on fast paths cannot be good.
>
> Patch is not fully polished, but it compiles and runs
> on Gen9 at least.
>
> v2:
> * Change return from intel_ring_begin to error pointer by
> popular demand.
> * Move tail increment to intel_ring_advance to enable some
> error checking.
>
> v3:
> * Move tail advance back into intel_ring_begin.
> * Rebase and tidy.
>
> v4:
> * Complete rebase after a few months since v3.
>
> v5:
> * Remove unecessary cast and fix !debug compile. (Chris Wilson)
>
> v6:
> * Make intel_ring_offset take request as well.
> * Fix recording of request postfix plus a sprinkle of asserts.
> (Chris Wilson)
>
> v7:
> * Use intel_ring_offset to get the postfix. (Chris Wilson)
> * Convert GVT code as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Zhi Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Zhi, could you please check that they way I handled the GVT
> code makes sense.
>
> I changed copy_gma_to_hva to return error or number of bytes
> copied since that makes it easier for the new flavour of
> intel_ring_begin and intel_ring_advance to work.
>
> I was only able to compile test it.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tvrtko
> ---
> @@ -2608,36 +2605,33 @@ static int shadow_workload_ring_buffer(struct
> intel_vgpu_workload *workload)
> gma_top = workload->rb_start + guest_rb_size;
>
> /* allocate shadow ring buffer */
> - ret = intel_ring_begin(workload->req, workload->rb_len / 4);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + out = intel_ring_begin(workload->req, workload->rb_len / sizeof(u32));
> + if (IS_ERR(out))
> + return PTR_ERR(out);
>
> /* get shadow ring buffer va */
> - workload->shadow_ring_buffer_va = ring->vaddr + ring->tail;
> + workload->shadow_ring_buffer_va = out;
>
> /* head > tail --> copy head <-> top */
> if (gma_head > gma_tail) {
> ret = copy_gma_to_hva(vgpu, vgpu->gtt.ggtt_mm,
> - gma_head, gma_top,
> - workload->shadow_ring_buffer_va);
> - if (ret) {
> + gma_head, gma_top, out);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> gvt_err("fail to copy guest ring buffer\n");
> return ret;
> }
> - copy_len = gma_top - gma_head;
> + out += ret / sizeof(u32);
> gma_head = workload->rb_start;
> }
>
> /* copy head or start <-> tail */
> - ret = copy_gma_to_hva(vgpu, vgpu->gtt.ggtt_mm,
> - gma_head, gma_tail,
> - workload->shadow_ring_buffer_va + copy_len);
> - if (ret) {
> + ret = copy_gma_to_hva(vgpu, vgpu->gtt.ggtt_mm, gma_head, gma_tail, out);
I would have done
out = copy_gma_to_have(... out);
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
