On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 09:22:39AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Daniel noticed a problem where is we wrote to an object with ring A in
> the middle of a very long running batch, then executed a quick batch on
> ring B before a batch that reads from the same object, its obj->ring would
> now point to ring B, but its last_write_seqno would be still relative to
> ring A. This would allow for the user to read from the object before the
> GPU had completed the write, as set_domain would only check that ring B
> had passed the last_write_seqno.
>
> To fix this simply (and inelegantly), we bump the last_write_seqno when
> switching rings so that the last_write_seqno is always relative to the
> current obj->ring.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <[email protected]>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
It was a bit trick, but I've stitched together an igt to exercise this
bug. Picked up for -fixes, thanks for the patch.
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index 774620d..7c59cb1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -1954,6 +1954,10 @@ i915_gem_object_move_to_active(struct
> drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> u32 seqno = intel_ring_get_seqno(ring);
>
> BUG_ON(ring == NULL);
> + if (obj->ring != ring && obj->last_write_seqno) {
> + /* Keep the seqno relative to the current ring */
> + obj->last_write_seqno = seqno;
> + }
> obj->ring = ring;
>
> /* Add a reference if we're newly entering the active list. */
> --
> 1.8.3.2
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
