Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]> writes: > Chris Wilson <[email protected]> writes: > >> If we stop filling the ELSP due to an incompatible virtual engine >> request, check if we should enable the timeslice on behalf of the queue. >> > > Leaves me pondering more of the why. > > So that on these boundaries also, the last rq gets subdued to > a timeslice and not get a free run?
I got some confirmations on irc. Yes this for that. The commit message could be augmented on the why emphasis! > >> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c >> index 5da86a40434c..954bd4797482 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_lrc.c >> @@ -1802,6 +1802,20 @@ static void set_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs >> *engine) >> set_timer_ms(&engine->execlists.timer, active_timeslice(engine)); >> } >> >> +static void start_timeslice(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, >> + struct i915_request *last) >> +{ >> + struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists = &engine->execlists; >> + >> + /* As we are returning early, update the hint from the queue */ >> + execlists->switch_priority_hint = >> + max(execlists->queue_priority_hint, >> + execlists->switch_priority_hint); Still not completely unclear how the all hints play together but the comment holds true, we bail out early. >> + >> + if (!execlists->timer.expires && need_timeslice(engine, last)) >> + set_timer_ms(&execlists->timer, timeslice(engine)); >> +} >> + >> static void record_preemption(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists) >> { >> (void)I915_SELFTEST_ONLY(execlists->preempt_hang.count++); >> @@ -1965,11 +1979,7 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs >> *engine) >> * Even if ELSP[1] is occupied and not worthy >> * of timeslices, our queue might be. >> */ >> - if (!execlists->timer.expires && >> - need_timeslice(engine, last)) >> - set_timer_ms(&execlists->timer, >> - timeslice(engine)); >> - >> + start_timeslice(engine, last); >> return; >> } >> } >> @@ -2004,6 +2014,7 @@ static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs >> *engine) >> >> if (last && !can_merge_rq(last, rq)) { >> spin_unlock(&ve->base.active.lock); >> + start_timeslice(engine, last); >> return; /* leave this for another */ > > for another interrupt? For another veng. The comment might have already been augmented. Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <[email protected]> > -Mika > >> } >> >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Intel-gfx mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
