Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Christian König
Am 22.07.20 um 16:30 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 2020-07-22 16:23, Christian König wrote: Am 22.07.20 um 16:07 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:12 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: I'm pretty sure there's more bugs, I just

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 16:23, Christian König wrote: Am 22.07.20 um 16:07 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:12 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: I'm pretty sure there's more bugs, I just haven't heard from them yet. Also due to the opt-in

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Christian König
Am 22.07.20 um 16:07 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:12 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: I'm pretty sure there's more bugs, I just haven't heard from them yet. Also due to the opt-in nature of dma-fence we can limit the scope of

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 3:12 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > On 2020-07-22 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Ah I think I misunderstood which options you want to compare here. I'm > > not sure how much pain fixing up "dma-fence as memory fence" really > > is. That's kinda why I want a lot more

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 14:41, Daniel Vetter wrote: Ah I think I misunderstood which options you want to compare here. I'm not sure how much pain fixing up "dma-fence as memory fence" really is. That's kinda why I want a lot more testing on my annotation patches, to figure that out. Not much feedback

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:22 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 2020-07-22 13:39, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:31 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) > > wrote: > >> > >> On 2020-07-22 11:45, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:05 AM Thomas Hellström

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 13:39, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:31 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 11:45, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:05 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 09:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 12:31 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 2020-07-22 11:45, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:05 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) > > wrote: > >> > >> On 2020-07-22 09:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM Thomas Hellström

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 11:45, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:05 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 09:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 00:45, Dave Airlie wrote: On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47,

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:05 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 2020-07-22 09:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) > > wrote: > >> > >> On 2020-07-22 00:45, Dave Airlie wrote: > >>> On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47, Thomas Hellström (Intel)

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 09:11, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 2020-07-22 00:45, Dave Airlie wrote: On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 8:45 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 2020-07-22 00:45, Dave Airlie wrote: > > On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47, Thomas Hellström (Intel) > > wrote: > >> > >> On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: > >>> Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-22 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-22 00:45, Dave Airlie wrote: On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM,

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Dave Airlie
On Tue, 21 Jul 2020 at 18:47, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: > > Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > >> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) > >> wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Dave Airlie
> > >> That's also why I'm not positive on the "no hw preemption, only > >> scheduler" case: You still have a dma_fence for the batch itself, > >> which means still no userspace controlled synchronization or other > >> form of indefinite batches allowed. So not getting us any closer to > >>

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 7:46 PM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 2020-07-21 15:59, Christian König wrote: > > Am 21.07.20 um 12:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): > ... > >> Yes, we can't do magic. As soon as an indefinite batch makes it to > >> such hardware we've lost. But since we

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Intel
On 2020-07-21 15:59, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 12:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): ... Yes, we can't do magic. As soon as an indefinite batch makes it to such hardware we've lost. But since we can break out while the batch is stuck in the scheduler waiting, what I believe we

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Christian König
Am 21.07.20 um 12:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 7/21/20 11:50 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:38 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 7/21/20 10:55 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 7/21/20 9:45 AM,

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Intel
On 7/21/20 11:50 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:38 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: On 7/21/20 10:55 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:38 AM Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > > > On 7/21/20 10:55 AM, Christian König wrote: > > Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): > >> > >> On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: > >>> Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > On Mon, Jul

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Intel
On 7/21/20 10:55 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 11:16 AM Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:55 AM Christian König > wrote: > > > > Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): > > > > > > On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: > > >> Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > > >>> On

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:55 AM Christian König wrote: > > Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): > > > > On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: > >> Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: > >>> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) > >>>

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Christian König
Am 21.07.20 um 10:47 schrieb Thomas Hellström (Intel): On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Comes up every few years, gets

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Intel
On 7/21/20 9:45 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's write this down once

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Christian König
Am 21.07.20 um 09:41 schrieb Daniel Vetter: On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's write this down once and for all. What I'm not sure about is

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-21 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 01:15:17PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote: > Hi, > > On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's > > write this down once and for all. > > > > What I'm not sure about is whether the text should be

Re: [Linaro-mm-sig] [PATCH 1/2] dma-buf.rst: Document why indefinite fences are a bad idea

2020-07-20 Thread Intel
Hi, On 7/9/20 2:33 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: Comes up every few years, gets somewhat tedious to discuss, let's write this down once and for all. What I'm not sure about is whether the text should be more explicit in flat out mandating the amdkfd eviction fences for long running compute