[PATCH 1/2] [WIP]drm/ttm: add waiter list to prevent allocation not in order

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

Attached is what you actually want to do cleanly implemented. But as I 
said this is a NO-GO.

Regards,
Christian.

Am 26.01.2018 um 13:43 schrieb Christian König:
>> After my investigation, this issue should be detect of TTM design 
>> self, which breaks scheduling balance.
> Yeah, but again. This is indented design we can't change easily.
>
> Regards,
> Christian.
>
> Am 26.01.2018 um 13:36 schrieb Zhou, David(ChunMing):
>> I am off work, so reply mail by phone, the format could not be text.
>>
>> back to topic itself:
>> the problem indeed happen on amdgpu driver, someone reports me that 
>> application runs with two instances, the performance are different.
>> I also reproduced the issue with unit test(bo_eviction_test). They 
>> always think our scheduler isn't working as expected.
>>
>> After my investigation, this issue should be detect of TTM design 
>> self, which breaks scheduling balance.
>>
>> Further, if we run containers for our gpu, container A could run high 
>> score, container B runs low score with same benchmark.
>>
>> So this is bug that we need fix.
>>
>> Regards,
>> David Zhou
>>
>> å??è?ªå??æ?? Pro
>>
>> Christian Ké°?ig <ckoenig.leichtzumerken at gmail.com> äº? 2018å¹´1æ??26æ?¥ 
>> ä¸?å??6:31å??é??ï¼?
>>
>> Am 26.01.2018 um 11:22 schrieb Chunming Zhou:
>> > there is a scheduling balance issue about get node like:
>> > a. process A allocates full memory and use it for submission.
>> > b. process B tries to allocates memory, will wait for process A BO 
>> idle in eviction.
>> > c. process A completes the job, process B eviction will put process 
>> A BO node,
>> > but in the meantime, process C is comming to allocate BO, whill 
>> directly get node successfully, and do submission,
>> > process B will again wait for process C BO idle.
>> > d. repeat the above setps, process B could be delayed much more.
>> >
>> > later allocation must not be ahead of front in same place.
>>
>> Again NAK to the whole approach.
>>
>> At least with amdgpu the problem you described above never occurs
>> because evictions are pipelined operations. We could only block for
>> deleted regions to become free.
>>
>> But independent of that incoming memory requests while we make room for
>> eviction are intended to be served first.
>>
>> Changing that is certainly a no-go cause that would favor memory hungry
>> applications over small clients.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>> >
>> > Change-Id: I3daa892e50f82226c552cc008a29e55894a98f18
>> > Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou at amd.com>
>> > ---
>> >   drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c    | 69 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> >   include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h    |  7 +++++
>> >   include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h |  7 +++++
>> >   3 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c 
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
>> > index d33a6bb742a1..558ec2cf465d 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/ttm/ttm_bo.c
>> > @@ -841,6 +841,58 @@ static int ttm_bo_add_move_fence(struct 
>> ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> >        return 0;
>> >   }
>> >
>> > +static void ttm_man_init_waiter(struct ttm_bo_waiter *waiter,
>> > +                             struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> > +                             const struct ttm_place *place)
>> > +{
>> > +     waiter->tbo = bo;
>> > +     memcpy((void *)&waiter->place, (void *)place, sizeof(*place));
>> > +     INIT_LIST_HEAD(&waiter->list);
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > +static void ttm_man_add_waiter(struct ttm_mem_type_manager *man,
>> > +                            struct ttm_bo_waiter *waiter)
>> > +{
>> > +     if (!waiter)
>> > +             return;
>> > +     spin_lock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     list_add_tail(&waiter->list, &man->waiter_list);
>> > +     spin_unlock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > +static void ttm_man_del_waiter(struct ttm_mem_type_manager *man,
>> > +                            struct ttm_bo_waiter *waiter)
>> > +{
>> > +     if (!waiter)
>> > +             return;
>> > +     spin_lock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     if (!list_empty(&waiter->list))
>> > +             list_del(&waiter->list);
>> > +     spin_unlock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     kfree(waiter);
>> > +}
>> > +
>> > +int ttm_man_check_bo(struct ttm_mem_type_manager *man,
>> > +                  struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> > +                  const struct ttm_place *place)
>> > +{
>> > +     struct ttm_bo_waiter *waiter, *tmp;
>> > +
>> > +     spin_lock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     list_for_each_entry_safe(waiter, tmp, &man->waiter_list, list) {
>> > +             if ((bo != waiter->tbo) &&
>> > +                 ((place->fpfn >= waiter->place.fpfn &&
>> > +                   place->fpfn <= waiter->place.lpfn) ||
>> > +                  (place->lpfn <= waiter->place.lpfn && place->lpfn >=
>> > +                   waiter->place.fpfn)))
>> > +                 goto later_bo;
>> > +     }
>> > +     spin_unlock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     return true;
>> > +later_bo:
>> > +     spin_unlock(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     return false;
>> > +}
>> >   /**
>> >    * Repeatedly evict memory from the LRU for @mem_type until we 
>> create enough
>> >    * space, or we've evicted everything and there isn't enough space.
>> > @@ -853,17 +905,26 @@ static int ttm_bo_mem_force_space(struct 
>> ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> >   {
>> >        struct ttm_bo_device *bdev = bo->bdev;
>> >        struct ttm_mem_type_manager *man = &bdev->man[mem_type];
>> > +     struct ttm_bo_waiter waiter;
>> >        int ret;
>> >
>> > +     ttm_man_init_waiter(&waiter, bo, place);
>> > +     ttm_man_add_waiter(man, &waiter);
>> >        do {
>> >                ret = (*man->func->get_node)(man, bo, place, mem);
>> > -             if (unlikely(ret != 0))
>> > +             if (unlikely(ret != 0)) {
>> > +                     ttm_man_del_waiter(man, &waiter);
>> >                        return ret;
>> > -             if (mem->mm_node)
>> > +             }
>> > +             if (mem->mm_node) {
>> > +                     ttm_man_del_waiter(man, &waiter);
>> >                        break;
>> > +             }
>> >                ret = ttm_mem_evict_first(bdev, mem_type, place, ctx);
>> > -             if (unlikely(ret != 0))
>> > +             if (unlikely(ret != 0)) {
>> > +                     ttm_man_del_waiter(man, &waiter);
>> >                        return ret;
>> > +             }
>> >        } while (1);
>> >        mem->mem_type = mem_type;
>> >        return ttm_bo_add_move_fence(bo, man, mem);
>> > @@ -1450,6 +1511,8 @@ int ttm_bo_init_mm(struct ttm_bo_device 
>> *bdev, unsigned type,
>> >        man->use_io_reserve_lru = false;
>> >        mutex_init(&man->io_reserve_mutex);
>> >        spin_lock_init(&man->move_lock);
>> > +     spin_lock_init(&man->wait_lock);
>> > +     INIT_LIST_HEAD(&man->waiter_list);
>> >        INIT_LIST_HEAD(&man->io_reserve_lru);
>> >
>> >        ret = bdev->driver->init_mem_type(bdev, type, man);
>> > diff --git a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h 
>> b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h
>> > index 2cd025c2abe7..0fce4dbd02e7 100644
>> > --- a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h
>> > +++ b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_api.h
>> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
>> >   #include <linux/mm.h>
>> >   #include <linux/bitmap.h>
>> >   #include <linux/reservation.h>
>> > +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_placement.h>
>> >
>> >   struct ttm_bo_device;
>> >
>> > @@ -232,6 +233,12 @@ struct ttm_buffer_object {
>> >        struct mutex wu_mutex;
>> >   };
>> >
>> > +struct ttm_bo_waiter {
>> > +     struct ttm_buffer_object *tbo;
>> > +     struct ttm_place place;
>> > +     struct list_head list;
>> > +};
>> > +
>> >   /**
>> >    * struct ttm_bo_kmap_obj
>> >    *
>> > diff --git a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h 
>> b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h
>> > index 9b417eb2df20..dc6b8b4c9e06 100644
>> > --- a/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h
>> > +++ b/include/drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h
>> > @@ -293,6 +293,10 @@ struct ttm_mem_type_manager {
>> >        bool io_reserve_fastpath;
>> >        spinlock_t move_lock;
>> >
>> > +     /* waiters in list */
>> > +     spinlock_t wait_lock;
>> > +     struct list_head waiter_list;
>> > +
>> >        /*
>> >         * Protected by @io_reserve_mutex:
>> >         */
>> > @@ -748,6 +752,9 @@ int ttm_bo_mem_space(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> >                     struct ttm_mem_reg *mem,
>> >                     struct ttm_operation_ctx *ctx);
>> >
>> > +int ttm_man_check_bo(struct ttm_mem_type_manager *man,
>> > +                  struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> > +                  const struct ttm_place *place);
>> >   void ttm_bo_mem_put(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo, struct 
>> ttm_mem_reg *mem);
>> >   void ttm_bo_mem_put_locked(struct ttm_buffer_object *bo,
>> >                           struct ttm_mem_reg *mem);
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20180126/10a5dc90/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-drm-ttm-alloc-only-one-memory-allocation-operation-a.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1687 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/amd-gfx/attachments/20180126/10a5dc90/attachment-0001.bin>
[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux