Re: Kernel and ADM hardware roulette ( was AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later )

I think the prime issue is that dma_direct_alloc respects the dma mask. Which we don't need if actually using the iommu. This would be mostly harmless exept for the the SEV bit high in the address that makes the checks fail. For now I'd say revert this commit for 4.17/4.18-rc and I'll look into

Re: Kernel and ADM hardware roulette ( was AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later )

I think the prime issue is that dma_direct_alloc respects the dma mask. Which we don't need if actually using the iommu. This would be mostly harmless exept for the the SEV bit high in the address that makes the checks fail. For now I'd say revert this commit for 4.17/4.18-rc and I'll look into

Re: Kernel and ADM hardware roulette ( was AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later )

Am 06.06.2018 um 16:12 schrieb Michel Dänzer: On 2018-06-06 03:33 PM, Gabriel C wrote: 2018-06-06 14:19 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-06-06 13:33 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 13:28 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-11 7:02 GMT+02:00

Re: Kernel and ADM hardware roulette ( was AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later )

Am 06.06.2018 um 16:12 schrieb Michel Dänzer: On 2018-06-06 03:33 PM, Gabriel C wrote: 2018-06-06 14:19 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-06-06 13:33 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 13:28 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-11 7:02 GMT+02:00

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.06.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-06-06 13:33 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 13:28 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-11 7:02 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : 2018-04-11 6:00 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.06.2018 um 14:08 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-06-06 13:33 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 06.06.2018 um 13:28 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-11 7:02 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : 2018-04-11 6:00 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 2018-04-20 09:40 PM, Felix Kuehling wrote: > On 2018-04-20 10:47 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: >> On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >>> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 07.04.2018

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 2018-04-20 09:40 PM, Felix Kuehling wrote: > On 2018-04-20 10:47 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: >> On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >>> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin:

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

[+Philip] On 2018-04-20 10:47 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >>> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >>> : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: > Hi

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

[+Philip] On 2018-04-20 10:47 AM, Michel Dänzer wrote: > On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >>> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >>> : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: > Hi Christian, > > Thanks for

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >> : >>> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 2018-04-11 11:37 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >> : >>> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at:

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-12 0:20 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-11 20:35 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Valin : >> On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with 4.15++ kernels. The whole Desktop is acting weird. This one

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-12 0:20 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-11 20:35 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Valin : >> On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with 4.15++ kernels. The whole Desktop is acting weird. This one is using an Cape Verde PRO [Radeon HD

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 20:35 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Valin : > On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >>> With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with 4.15++ kernels. >>> The whole Desktop is acting weird. This one is using >>> an Cape Verde PRO [Radeon HD 7750/8740 / R7 250E]

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 20:35 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Valin : > On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >>> With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with 4.15++ kernels. >>> The whole Desktop is acting weird. This one is using >>> an Cape Verde PRO [Radeon HD 7750/8740 / R7 250E] GPU. >>> >>> Box is 2 *

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >> With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with  4.15++ kernels. >> The whole Desktop is acting weird.  This one is using >> an Cape Verde PRO [Radeon HD 7750/8740 / R7 250E] GPU. >> >> Box is  2 * EPYC 7281 with 128 GB ECC RAM >> >> Also a 14C Xeon

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 04/11/2018 05:37 AM, Christian König wrote: >> With your patches my EPYC box is unusable with  4.15++ kernels. >> The whole Desktop is acting weird.  This one is using >> an Cape Verde PRO [Radeon HD 7750/8740 / R7 250E] GPU. >> >> Box is  2 * EPYC 7281 with 128 GB ECC RAM >> >> Also a 14C Xeon

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 16:26 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-11 11:37 GMT+02:00 Christian König : >> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: ... >> >> Please test Alex's amd-staging-drm-next branch from >> git://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux. > > I'm on

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 16:26 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-11 11:37 GMT+02:00 Christian König : >> Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: ... >> >> Please test Alex's amd-staging-drm-next branch from >> git://people.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux. > > I'm on it just the connection to freedesktop.org is

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 11:37 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >> >> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >> : >>> >>> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian,

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-11 11:37 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: >> >> 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König >> : >>> >>> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at:

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 11.04.2018 um 06:00 schrieb Gabriel C: 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 Feel free to comment

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

>2018-04-11 6:00 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : >> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: ... > I can help testing code for 4.17/++ if you wish but that is *different* > storry. > Quick tested

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

>2018-04-11 6:00 GMT+02:00 Gabriel C : > 2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : >> Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: ... > I can help testing code for 4.17/++ if you wish but that is *different* > storry. > Quick tested an 4.16.0-11490-gb284d4d5a678 , amdgpu and radeon driver

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: >> >> Hi Christian, >> >> Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 >> Feel free to

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

2018-04-09 11:42 GMT+02:00 Christian König : > Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: >> >> Hi Christian, >> >> Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: >> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 >> Feel free to comment since you have a better

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 09.04.2018 um 17:17 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: On 04/09/2018 05:42 AM, Christian König wrote: Backporting all the detection logic is to invasive, but you could just go into drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c and forcefull use the other code path. Just look out for "#ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB"

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 09.04.2018 um 17:17 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: On 04/09/2018 05:42 AM, Christian König wrote: Backporting all the detection logic is to invasive, but you could just go into drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c and forcefull use the other code path. Just look out for "#ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB"

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 04/09/2018 05:42 AM, Christian König wrote: > Backporting all the detection logic is to invasive, but you could just > go into drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c and forcefull use the > other code path. > > Just look out for "#ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB" checks and disable those. Do you mean

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

On 04/09/2018 05:42 AM, Christian König wrote: > Backporting all the detection logic is to invasive, but you could just > go into drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ttm.c and forcefull use the > other code path. > > Just look out for "#ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB" checks and disable those. Do you mean

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 Feel free to comment since you have a better understanding of what's going on. One last question: right now

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 07.04.2018 um 00:00 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 Feel free to comment since you have a better understanding of what's going on. One last question: right now

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 Feel free to comment since you have a better understanding of what's going on. One last question: right now I'm running 4.15.0 with the "offending" patch

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, Thanks for the info. FYI, I've also opened a Firefox bug for that at: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1448778 Feel free to comment since you have a better understanding of what's going on. One last question: right now I'm running 4.15.0 with the "offending" patch

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.04.2018 um 18:42 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, On 04/09/2018 07:48 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Only at compile time by not setting

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.04.2018 um 18:42 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, On 04/09/2018 07:48 AM, Christian König wrote: Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Only at compile time by not setting

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, On 04/09/2018 07:48 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: >> Hi Christian, >> >> Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? > > Only at compile time by not setting CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE. Any reason why echo never

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, On 04/09/2018 07:48 AM, Christian König wrote: > Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: >> Hi Christian, >> >> Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? > > Only at compile time by not setting CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE. Any reason why echo never

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Only at compile time by not setting CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE. Alternatively you can avoid enabling CONFIG_SWIOTLB which will avoid the slow DMA path as well.

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Am 06.04.2018 um 17:30 schrieb Jean-Marc Valin: Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Only at compile time by not setting CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE. Alternatively you can avoid enabling CONFIG_SWIOTLB which will avoid the slow DMA path as well.

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Right now the recent kernels are making Firefox pretty much unusable for me. I've been able to revert the patch from 4.15 but it's not really a long-term solution. You mention that the purpose of the patch is to

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Christian, Is there a way to turn off these huge pages at boot-time/run-time? Right now the recent kernels are making Firefox pretty much unusable for me. I've been able to revert the patch from 4.15 but it's not really a long-term solution. You mention that the purpose of the patch is to

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Jean, found the bug reports. Here is the original bug report from the kernel: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198511 And here is an fdo bug report where we tried to investigate the root cause, but didn't had time for that yet:

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Jean, found the bug reports. Here is the original bug report from the kernel: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198511 And here is an fdo bug report where we tried to investigate the root cause, but didn't had time for that yet:

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Jean, yeah, that is a known problem. Using huge pages improves the performance because of better TLB usage, but for the cost of higher allocation overhead. What we found is that firefox is doing something rather strange by allocating large textures and then just trowing them away again

Re: AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi Jean, yeah, that is a known problem. Using huge pages improves the performance because of better TLB usage, but for the cost of higher allocation overhead. What we found is that firefox is doing something rather strange by allocating large textures and then just trowing them away again

AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi, I noticed a serious graphics performance regression between 4.14 and 4.15. It is most noticeable with Firefox (tried FF57 through FF60) and causes scrolling to be really choppy/sluggish. I've confirmed that the problem is also there on 4.16, while 4.13 works fine. After a bisection, I've

AMD graphics performance regression in 4.15 and later

Hi, I noticed a serious graphics performance regression between 4.14 and 4.15. It is most noticeable with Firefox (tried FF57 through FF60) and causes scrolling to be really choppy/sluggish. I've confirmed that the problem is also there on 4.16, while 4.13 works fine. After a bisection, I've