On 03/05/2017 12:37, Chris Wilson wrote:
If we do not require to perform priority bumping, and we haven't yet
submitted the request, we can update its priority in situ and skip
acquiring the engine locks -- thus avoiding any contention between us
and submit/execute.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 11 +++++++++++
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index fb0025627676..ca7f28795e2d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -767,6 +767,17 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request 
*request, int prio)
                list_safe_reset_next(dep, p, dfs_link);
        }

+       /* If we didn't need to bump any existing priorites, and we haven't

priorities

+        * yet submitted this request (i..e there is no porential race with

potential

+        * execlists_submit_request()), we can set our own priority and skip
+        * acquiring the engine locks.
+        */
+       if (request->priotree.priority == INT_MIN) {
+               request->priotree.priority = prio;
+               if (stack.dfs_link.next == stack.dfs_link.prev)
+                       return;

Move the assignment of the priority under the if?

+       }
+
        engine = request->engine;
        spin_lock_irq(&engine->timeline->lock);



Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to