Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_balancer: Race breadcrumb signaling against timeslicing

2020-07-17 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-07-17 09:34:07) > > On 16/07/2020 21:44, Chris Wilson wrote: > I am not sure if the batch duration is not too short in practice, the > add loop will really rapidly end all, just needs 64 iterations on > average to end all 32 I think. So 64 WC writes from the CPU

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_balancer: Race breadcrumb signaling against timeslicing

2020-07-17 Thread Tvrtko Ursulin
On 16/07/2020 21:44, Chris Wilson wrote: This is an attempt to chase down some preempt-to-busy races with breadcrumb signaling on the virtual engines. By using more semaphore spinners than available engines, we encourage very short timeslices, and we make each batch of random duration to try

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_balancer: Race breadcrumb signaling against timeslicing

2020-07-16 Thread Chris Wilson
This is an attempt to chase down some preempt-to-busy races with breadcrumb signaling on the virtual engines. By using more semaphore spinners than available engines, we encourage very short timeslices, and we make each batch of random duration to try and coincide the end of a batch with the