> so the conclusion is if we have vm-flush, we make sure 128dw between
> vm flush and CE ib, if we don't insert vm flush we stil make sure 128
> DW between SWITCH_BUFFER and CE ib.
>
Good point.
> if you reject this patch, please give me a solution to fix above VM fault
>
Well, we could follow the windows approach, e.g. increase padding to
256dw and separate the VM flush in it's own submission.
But that's more a long term fix, for now I'm ok with that patch and just
reviewed your v4 of it.
Regards,
Christian.
Am 19.01.2017 um 04:19 schrieb Liu, Monk:
>
> current code missed the 128 DW after SWITCH_BUFFER, even without vm
> flush, we still need those 128 DW betwen previous frame's
> SWITCH_BUFFER and current frame's CE ib,
>
> and this patch fixed this issue as well otherwise in SRIOV case
> (Unigeen HEAVEN) CE will meet vm fault, and in steam OS case (DOTA2)
> will meet VM fault as well.
>
>
> so the conclusion is if we have vm-flush, we make sure 128dw between
> vm flush and CE ib, if we don't insert vm flush we stil make sure 128
> DW between SWITCH_BUFFER and CE ib.
>
>
> if you reject this patch, please give me a solution to fix above VM fault
>
>
> BR Monk
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *å??件人:* amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> 代表 Christian
> König <deathsimple at vodafone.de>
> *å??é??æ?¶é?´:* 2017å¹´1æ??18æ?¥ 20:52:14
> *�件人:* Liu, Monk; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> *主é¢?:* Re: ç?å¤?: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu:guarantee 128dws between vm flush and
> IB
> > suppose hw_submit_count in gpu_scheduler is 2 (by default), and
> > without suppress frame size under 256, we may sometime submit 256dw,
> > and sometime submit 512 dw, and that could lead to CPU override ring
> > buffer content which is under processing by GPU, e.g. :
> >
> The max_dw parameter for amdgpu_ring_init() is multiplied by
> amdgpu_sched_hw_submission. See amdgpu_ring_init():
>
> ring->ring_size = roundup_pow_of_two(max_dw * 4 *
> amdgpu_sched_hw_submission);
>
> Since we use 1024 for max_dw for the GFX, Compute and SDMA rings using
> 512 dw is perfectly ok.
>
> Even if we ever try to submit more than 1024 including padding we will
> get a nice warning in the logs. See amdgpu_ring_alloc():
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ndw > ring->max_dw))
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> > another reason is we keep each DMAframe to 256dw is for better
> > performance.
> >
> Well considering what else we have in those command buffers I would
> strongly say that this is negligible.
>
> So NAK on that patch as long as we don't have a good reason for it.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
> Am 18.01.2017 um 11:11 schrieb Liu, Monk:
> >
> > >First question why do we want to limit the dw per submit to 256? Some
> > >limitation for SRIOV?
> >
> >
> > [ML]
> >
> > suppose hw_submit_count in gpu_scheduler is 2 (by default), and
> > without suppress frame size under 256, we may sometime submit 256dw,
> > and sometime submit 512 dw, and that could lead to CPU override ring
> > buffer content which is under processing by GPU, e.g. :
> >
> >
> > we assume ring buffer size = 512 dw (so ring buffer can hold 2 hw
> > submit) for easy understanding.
> >
> >
> > hw_count =2;
> >
> > submit job-1 (take 256 dw)
> >
> > hw_count = 1;
> >
> > submit job-2 (take 256 dw) //now ring buffer is full
> >
> > hw_count =0;
> >
> > gpu_scheduler waiting
> >
> > ...
> >
> > job-1 signaled, then hw_count => 1
> >
> > submit job3, and the job3 is filled in the head of RB (wrapped)
> >
> > but job3 take 512 dw (e.g. it takes 259 dw, but we aligned it to 512)
> >
> >
> > job-2 still under processing, but the package belongs to job-2 is
> > override by job3, disaster ...
> >
> >
> > another reason is we keep each DMAframe to 256dw is for better
> > performance.
> >
> >
> > BR Monk
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *å??件人:* Christian König <deathsimple at vodafone.de>
> > *å??é??æ?¶é?´:* 2017å¹´1æ??18æ?¥ 17:28:15
> > *�件人:* Liu, Monk; amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> > *主�:* Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu:guarantee 128dws between vm flush and IB
> > Am 18.01.2017 um 06:55 schrieb Monk Liu:
> > > previously we always insert 128nops behind vm_flush, which
> > > may lead to DAMframe size above 256 dw and automatially aligned
> > > to 512 dw.
> > >
> > > now we calculate how many DWs already inserted after vm_flush
> > > and make up for the reset to pad up to 128dws before emit_ib.
> > >
> > > that way we only take 256 dw per submit.
> >
> > First question why do we want to limit the dw per submit to 256? Some
> > limitation for SRIOV?
> >
> > Then for the implementation, please don't add all that counting to the
> > different functions. Instead save the current position in the ring in
> > emit_vm_flush and then calculate in emit_cntxcntl() how many dw we still
> > need to add to have at least 128. E.g. call the variable something like
> > last_vm_flush_pos.
> >
> > That makes the code way more robust towards any changes.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Christian.
> >
> > >
> > > Change-Id: Iac198e16f35b071476ba7bd48ab338223f6fe650
> > > Signed-off-by: Monk Liu <Monk.Liu at amd.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h | 1 +
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c | 24
> ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
> > > index c813cbe..1dbe600 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ring.h
> > > @@ -173,6 +173,7 @@ struct amdgpu_ring {
> > > #if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
> > > struct dentry *ent;
> > > #endif
> > > + u32 dws_between_vm_ib;
> > > };
> > >
> > > int amdgpu_ring_alloc(struct amdgpu_ring *ring, unsigned ndw);
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
> > > index 5f37313..76b1315 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
> > > @@ -5670,6 +5670,8 @@ static void
> > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_gds_switch(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, amdgpu_gds_reg_offset[vmid].oa);
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, 0);
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, (1 << (oa_size + oa_base)) - (1 <<
> > oa_base));
> > > +
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 20;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static uint32_t wave_read_ind(struct amdgpu_device *adev, uint32_t
> > simd, uint32_t wave, uint32_t address)
> > > @@ -6489,6 +6491,8 @@ static void
> > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_hdp_flush(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, ref_and_mask);
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, ref_and_mask);
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, 0x20); /* poll interval */
> > > +
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 7;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_vgt_flush(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
> > > @@ -6500,6 +6504,8 @@ static void
> > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_vgt_flush(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, PACKET3(PACKET3_EVENT_WRITE, 0));
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, EVENT_TYPE(VGT_FLUSH) |
> > > EVENT_INDEX(0));
> > > +
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 4;
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > @@ -6573,6 +6579,7 @@ static void
> > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_fence_gfx(struct amdgpu_ring *ring, u64 addr,
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, lower_32_bits(seq));
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, upper_32_bits(seq));
> > >
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 6;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_pipeline_sync(struct amdgpu_ring
> *ring)
> > > @@ -6639,6 +6646,8 @@ static void gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_vm_flush(struct
> > amdgpu_ring *ring,
> > > /* GFX8 emits 128 dw nop to prevent CE access VM
> > before vm_flush finish */
> > > amdgpu_ring_insert_nop(ring, 128);
> > > }
> > > +
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib = 0; /* clear before recalculate */
> > > }
> > >
> > > static u32 gfx_v8_0_ring_get_wptr_compute(struct amdgpu_ring *ring)
> > > @@ -6711,9 +6720,11 @@ static void gfx_v8_ring_emit_cntxcntl(struct
> > amdgpu_ring *ring, uint32_t flags)
> > > {
> > > uint32_t dw2 = 0;
> > >
> > > - if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(ring->adev))
> > > + if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(ring->adev)) {
> > > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_ce_meta_init(ring,
> > > (flags & AMDGPU_VM_DOMAIN) ? AMDGPU_CSA_VADDR
> > : ring->adev->virt.csa_vmid0_addr);
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 8;
> > > + }
> > >
> > > dw2 |= 0x80000000; /* set load_enable otherwise this package
> > is just NOPs */
> > > if (flags & AMDGPU_HAVE_CTX_SWITCH) {
> > > @@ -6739,10 +6750,19 @@ static void gfx_v8_ring_emit_cntxcntl(struct
> > amdgpu_ring *ring, uint32_t flags)
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, PACKET3(PACKET3_CONTEXT_CONTROL, 1));
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, dw2);
> > > amdgpu_ring_write(ring, 0);
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 3;
> > >
> > > - if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(ring->adev))
> > > + if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(ring->adev)) {
> > > gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_de_meta_init(ring,
> > > (flags & AMDGPU_VM_DOMAIN) ? AMDGPU_CSA_VADDR
> > : ring->adev->virt.csa_vmid0_addr);
> > > + ring->dws_between_vm_ib += 21;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /* emit_de_meta_init should be the last package right before
> > emi_ib,
> > > + * and we need to pad some NOPs before emit_ib to prevent CE
> > run ahead of
> > > + * vm_flush, which may trigger VM fault.
> > > + */
> > > + amdgpu_ring_insert_nop(ring, 128 - ring->dws_between_vm_ib);
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void gfx_v8_0_ring_emit_rreg(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
> > uint32_t reg)
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> amd-gfx mailing list
> amd-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/attachments/20170119/bbddf8e2/attachment-0001.html>
