On 29/01/2019 17:02, Chris Wilson wrote:
On unwinding the active request we give it a small (limited to internal
priority levels) boost to prevent it from being gazumped a second time.
However, this means that it can be promoted to above the request that
triggered the preemption request, causing a preempt-to-idle cycle for no
change. We can avoid this if we take the boost into account when
checking if the preemption request is valid.
v2: After preemption the active request will be after the preemptee if
they end up with equal priority.
v3: Tvrtko pointed out that this, the existing logic, makes
I915_PRIORITY_WAIT non-preemptible. Document this interesting quirk!
v4: Prove Tvrtko was right about WAIT being non-preemptible and test it.
I thought there would be a simpler solution coming for now. :)
In this version WAIT only doesn't preempt if the last rq from a ctx in
port0 is already active, otherwise it still preempts.
Also, by making WAIT not-preempt in this way, we kick the tasklet,
right? Only to decide we won't preempt. Or might not, depending on
i915_request_started.
I thought for now we would do something like:
static inline bool __execlists_need_preempt(int prio, int last)
{
return prio > max(I915_MIN_PREEMPT_PRIORITY, last);
}
With some consideration about what to do about needless tasklet kicking
as well..
Regards,
Tvrtko
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 45 ++++++++-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 148 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index dec4e1b04ae1..62d98b7edc7a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -164,6 +164,8 @@
#define WA_TAIL_DWORDS 2
#define WA_TAIL_BYTES (sizeof(u32) * WA_TAIL_DWORDS)
+#define ACTIVE_PRIORITY (I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT)
+
static int execlists_context_deferred_alloc(struct i915_gem_context *ctx,
struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
struct intel_context *ce);
@@ -188,6 +190,34 @@ static inline int rq_prio(const struct i915_request *rq)
return rq->sched.attr.priority;
}
+static inline int active_prio(const struct i915_request *rq)
+{
+ int prio = rq_prio(rq);
+
+ /*
+ * On unwinding the active request, we give it a priority bump
+ * equivalent to a freshly submitted request. This protects it from
+ * being gazumped again, but it would be preferable if we didn't
+ * let it be gazumped in the first place!
+ *
+ * See __unwind_incomplete_requests()
+ */
+ if ((prio & ACTIVE_PRIORITY) != ACTIVE_PRIORITY &&
+ i915_request_started(rq)) {
+ /*
+ * After preemption, we insert the active request at the
+ * end of the new priority level. This means that we will be
+ * _lower_ priority than the preemptee all things equal (and
+ * so the preemption is valid), so adjust our comparison
+ * accordingly.
+ */
+ prio |= ACTIVE_PRIORITY;
+ prio--;
+ }
+
+ return prio;
+}
+
static int queue_prio(const struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
{
struct i915_priolist *p;
@@ -208,7 +238,7 @@ static int queue_prio(const struct intel_engine_execlists
*execlists)
static inline bool need_preempt(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
const struct i915_request *rq)
{
- const int last_prio = rq_prio(rq);
+ int last_prio;
if (!intel_engine_has_preemption(engine))
return false;
@@ -228,6 +258,7 @@ static inline bool need_preempt(const struct
intel_engine_cs *engine,
* preempt. If that hint is stale or we may be trying to preempt
* ourselves, ignore the request.
*/
+ last_prio = active_prio(rq);
if (!__execlists_need_preempt(engine->execlists.queue_priority_hint,
last_prio))
return false;
@@ -353,7 +384,7 @@ __unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
struct i915_request *rq, *rn, *active = NULL;
struct list_head *uninitialized_var(pl);
- int prio = I915_PRIORITY_INVALID | I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT;
+ int prio = I915_PRIORITY_INVALID | ACTIVE_PRIORITY;
lockdep_assert_held(&engine->timeline.lock);
@@ -384,9 +415,15 @@ __unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
* The active request is now effectively the start of a new client
* stream, so give it the equivalent small priority bump to prevent
* it being gazumped a second time by another peer.
+ *
+ * One consequence of this preemption boost is that we may jump
+ * over lesser priorities (such as I915_PRIORITY_WAIT), effectively
+ * making those priorities non-preemptible. They will be moved forward
+ * in the priority queue, but they will not gain immediate access to
+ * the GPU.
*/
- if (!(prio & I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT)) {
- prio |= I915_PRIORITY_NEWCLIENT;
+ if ((prio & ACTIVE_PRIORITY) != ACTIVE_PRIORITY) {
+ prio |= ACTIVE_PRIORITY;
active->sched.attr.priority = prio;
list_move_tail(&active->sched.link,
i915_sched_lookup_priolist(engine, prio));
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c
index fb35f53c9ce3..28fdcbcb7267 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_lrc.c
@@ -405,6 +405,112 @@ static int live_suppress_self_preempt(void *arg)
goto err_client_b;
}
+static int live_suppress_wait_preempt(void *arg)
+{
+ struct drm_i915_private *i915 = arg;
+ struct preempt_client client[4];
+ struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
+ enum intel_engine_id id;
+ intel_wakeref_t wakeref;
+ int err = -ENOMEM;
+ int i;
+
+ /*
+ * Waiters are given a little priority nudge, but not enough
+ * to actually cause any preemption. Double check that we do
+ * not needlessly generate preempt-to-idle cycles.
+ */
+
+ if (!HAS_LOGICAL_RING_PREEMPTION(i915))
+ return 0;
+
+ if (USES_GUC_SUBMISSION(i915))
+ return 0; /* presume black blox */
+
+ mutex_lock(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
+ wakeref = intel_runtime_pm_get(i915);
+
+ if (preempt_client_init(i915, &client[0])) /* ELSP[0] */
+ goto err_unlock;
+ if (preempt_client_init(i915, &client[1])) /* ELSP[1] */
+ goto err_client_0;
+ if (preempt_client_init(i915, &client[2])) /* head of queue */
+ goto err_client_1;
+ if (preempt_client_init(i915, &client[3])) /* bystander */
+ goto err_client_2;
+
+ for_each_engine(engine, i915, id) {
+ int depth;
+
+ for (depth = 0; depth < ARRAY_SIZE(client); depth++) {
+ struct i915_request *rq[ARRAY_SIZE(client)];
+
+ engine->execlists.preempt_hang.count = 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(client); i++) {
+ rq[i] =
igt_spinner_create_request(&client[i].spin,
+
client[i].ctx, engine,
+ MI_NOOP);
+ if (IS_ERR(rq[i])) {
+ err = PTR_ERR(rq[i]);
+ goto err_wedged;
+ }
+
+ i915_request_add(rq[i]);
+ }
+ if (!igt_wait_for_spinner(&client[0].spin, rq[0])) {
+ pr_err("First client failed to start\n");
+ goto err_wedged;
+ }
+
+ if (i915_request_wait(rq[depth],
+ I915_WAIT_LOCKED |
+ I915_WAIT_PRIORITY,
+ 1) != -ETIME) {
+ pr_err("Waiter depth:%d completed!\n", depth);
+ goto err_wedged;
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(client); i++)
+ igt_spinner_end(&client[i].spin);
+
+ if (engine->execlists.preempt_hang.count) {
+ pr_err("Preemption recorded x%d, depth %d; should
have been suppressed!\n",
+ engine->execlists.preempt_hang.count,
+ depth);
+ err = -EINVAL;
+ goto err_client_3;
+ }
+
+ if (igt_flush_test(i915, I915_WAIT_LOCKED))
+ goto err_wedged;
+ }
+ }
+
+ err = 0;
+err_client_3:
+ preempt_client_fini(&client[3]);
+err_client_2:
+ preempt_client_fini(&client[2]);
+err_client_1:
+ preempt_client_fini(&client[1]);
+err_client_0:
+ preempt_client_fini(&client[0]);
+err_unlock:
+ if (igt_flush_test(i915, I915_WAIT_LOCKED))
+ err = -EIO;
+ intel_runtime_pm_put(i915, wakeref);
+ mutex_unlock(&i915->drm.struct_mutex);
+ return err;
+
+err_wedged:
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(client); i++)
+ igt_spinner_end(&client[i].spin);
+ i915_gem_set_wedged(i915);
+ err = -EIO;
+ goto err_client_3;
+}
+
static int live_preempt_hang(void *arg)
{
struct drm_i915_private *i915 = arg;
@@ -785,6 +891,7 @@ int intel_execlists_live_selftests(struct drm_i915_private
*i915)
SUBTEST(live_preempt),
SUBTEST(live_late_preempt),
SUBTEST(live_suppress_self_preempt),
+ SUBTEST(live_suppress_wait_preempt),
SUBTEST(live_preempt_hang),
SUBTEST(live_preempt_smoke),
};
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
