On 08/22/2018 04:33 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 04:07:20PM +0800, Zhang, Jerry wrote:
>> On 08/22/2018 03:52 PM, Huang Rui wrote:
>>> I continue to work for bulk moving that based on the proposal by Christian.
>>>
>>> Background:
>>> amdgpu driver will move all PD/PT and PerVM BOs into idle list. Then move all of
>>> them on the end of LRU list one by one. Thus, that cause so many BOs moved to
>>> the end of the LRU, and impact performance seriously.
>>>
>>> Then Christian provided a workaround to not move PD/PT BOs on LRU with below
>>> patch:
>>> Commit 0bbf32026cf5ba41e9922b30e26e1bed1ecd38ae ("drm/amdgpu: band aid
>>> validating VM PTs")
>>>
>>> However, the final solution should bulk move all PD/PT and PerVM BOs on the LRU
>>> instead of one by one.
>>>
>>> Whenever amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos() is called and we have BOs which need to be
>>> validated we move all BOs together to the end of the LRU without dropping the
>>> lock for the LRU.
>>>
>>> While doing so we note the beginning and end of this block in the LRU list.
>>>
>>> Now when amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos() is called and we don't have anything to do,
>>> we don't move every BO one by one, but instead cut the LRU list into pieces so
>>> that we bulk move everything to the end in just one operation.
>>>
>>> Test data:
>>> +--------------+-----------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+
>>> | |The Talos |Clpeak(OCL)|BusSpeedReadback(OCL) |
>>> | |Principle(Vulkan)| | |
>>> +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>> | | | |0.319 ms(1k) 0.314 ms(2K) 0.308 ms(4K) |
>>> | Original | 147.7 FPS | 76.86 us |0.307 ms(8K) 0.310 ms(16K) |
>>> +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>> | Orignial + WA| | |0.254 ms(1K) 0.241 ms(2K) |
>>> |(don't move | 162.1 FPS | 42.15 us |0.230 ms(4K) 0.223 ms(8K) 0.204 ms(16K)|
>>> |PT BOs on LRU)| | | |
>>> +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>>> | Bulk move | 163.1 FPS | 40.52 us |0.244 ms(1K) 0.252 ms(2K) 0.213 ms(4K) |
>>> | | | |0.214 ms(8K) 0.225 ms(16K) |
>>> +--------------+-----------------+-----------+---------------------------------------+
>>>
>>> After test them with above three benchmarks include vulkan and opencl. We can
>>> see the visible improvement than original, and even better than original with
>>> workaround.
>>>
>>> v2: move all BOs include idle, relocated, and moved list to the end of LRU and
>>> put them together.
>>> v3: remove unused parameter and use list_for_each_entry instead of the one with
>>> save entry.
>>> v4: move the amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail after command submission, at that time,
>>> all bo will be back on idle list.
>>> v5: remove amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail_by_list(), use bulk_moveable instread of
>>> validated, and move ttm_bo_bulk_move_lru_tail() also into
>>> amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christian König <christian.koenig at amd.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Huang Rui <ray.huang at amd.com>
>>> Tested-by: Mike Lothian <mike at fireburn.co.uk>
>>> Tested-by: Dieter Nützel <Dieter at nuetzel-hh.de>
>>> Acked-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou at amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c | 10 ++++++
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.h | 11 +++++-
>>> 3 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
>>> index 502b94f..4efdbd2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_cs.c
>>> @@ -1260,6 +1260,15 @@ static int amdgpu_cs_submit(struct amdgpu_cs_parser *p,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void amdgpu_cs_vm_move_on_lru(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>> + struct amdgpu_cs_parser *p)
>>> +{
>>> + struct amdgpu_fpriv *fpriv = p->filp->driver_priv;
>>> + struct amdgpu_vm *vm = &fpriv->vm;
>>> +
>>> + amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail(adev, vm);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> int amdgpu_cs_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *filp)
>>> {
>>> struct amdgpu_device *adev = dev->dev_private;
>>> @@ -1310,6 +1319,7 @@ int amdgpu_cs_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data, struct drm_file *filp)
>>>
>>> r = amdgpu_cs_submit(&parser, cs);
>>>
>>> + amdgpu_cs_vm_move_on_lru(adev, &parser);
>>
>> Looks we can call amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail() directly.
>
> Both ok, here, I just
>
>>
>>> out:
>>> amdgpu_cs_parser_fini(&parser, r, reserved_buffers);
>>> return r;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>> index 9c84770..db1f28a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.c
>>> @@ -268,6 +268,47 @@ void amdgpu_vm_get_pd_bo(struct amdgpu_vm *vm,
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> + * amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail - move all BOs to the end of LRU
>>> + *
>>> + * @adev: amdgpu device pointer
>>> + * @vm: vm providing the BOs
>>> + *
>>> + * Move all BOs to the end of LRU and remember their positions to put them
>>> + * together.
>>> + */
>>> +void amdgpu_vm_move_to_lru_tail(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
>>> + struct amdgpu_vm *vm)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ttm_bo_global *glob = adev->mman.bdev.glob;
>>> + struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *bo_base;
>>> +
>>> + if (vm->bulk_moveable) {
>>> + spin_lock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> + ttm_bo_bulk_move_lru_tail(&vm->lru_bulk_move);
>>> + spin_unlock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>
>> Question:
>> Why we handle bulk move in next command submission instead of current cs process?
>
> Bulk move is to move all pt and per-vm bos to the end of lru, after the cs
> is done, all the bos will move into the idle list again from moved and
> relocated list. Only bo from evicted is validated, we will remember and
> store the bo positions.
Thanks to reply.
with others fix, feel free to add my RB in this patch.
Regards,
Jerry
>
>>
>>> +
>>> + memset(&vm->lru_bulk_move, 0, sizeof(vm->lru_bulk_move));
>>> +
>>> + spin_lock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> + list_for_each_entry(bo_base, &vm->idle, vm_status) {
>>> + struct amdgpu_bo *bo = bo_base->bo;
>>> +
>>> + if (!bo->parent)
>>> + continue;
>>> +
>>> + ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->tbo, &vm->lru_bulk_move);
>>> + if (bo->shadow)
>>> + ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->shadow->tbo,
>>> + &vm->lru_bulk_move);
>>> + }
>>> + spin_unlock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> +
>>> + vm->bulk_moveable = true;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> * amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos - validate the page table BOs
>>> *
>>> * @adev: amdgpu device pointer
>>> @@ -284,10 +325,11 @@ int amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos(struct amdgpu_device *adev, struct amdgpu_vm *vm,
>>> int (*validate)(void *p, struct amdgpu_bo *bo),
>>> void *param)
>>> {
>>> - struct ttm_bo_global *glob = adev->mman.bdev.glob;
>>> struct amdgpu_vm_bo_base *bo_base, *tmp;
>>> int r = 0;
>>>
>>> + vm->bulk_moveable &= list_empty(&vm->evicted);
>>> +
>>> list_for_each_entry_safe(bo_base, tmp, &vm->evicted, vm_status) {
>>> struct amdgpu_bo *bo = bo_base->bo;
>>>
>>> @@ -295,12 +337,6 @@ int amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos(struct amdgpu_device *adev, struct amdgpu_vm *vm,
>>> r = validate(param, bo);
>>> if (r)
>>> break;
>>> -
>>> - spin_lock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> - ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->tbo, NULL);
>>> - if (bo->shadow)
>>> - ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->shadow->tbo, NULL);
>>> - spin_unlock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> }
>>>
>>> if (bo->tbo.type != ttm_bo_type_kernel) {
>>> @@ -312,20 +348,7 @@ int amdgpu_vm_validate_pt_bos(struct amdgpu_device *adev, struct amdgpu_vm *vm,
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> - spin_lock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> - list_for_each_entry(bo_base, &vm->idle, vm_status) {
>>> - struct amdgpu_bo *bo = bo_base->bo;
>>> -
>>> - if (!bo->parent)
>>> - continue;
>>> -
>>> - ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->tbo, NULL);
>>> - if (bo->shadow)
>>> - ttm_bo_move_to_lru_tail(&bo->shadow->tbo, NULL);
>>> - }
>>> - spin_unlock(&glob->lru_lock);
>>> -
>>> - return r;
>>> + return 0;
>>
>> Will it break from validate() and return r?
>
> Nice founding, this is my typo, that I don't modify it back.
>
>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> /**
>>> @@ -2596,6 +2619,7 @@ int amdgpu_vm_init(struct amdgpu_device *adev, struct amdgpu_vm *vm,
>>> return r;
>>>
>>> vm->pte_support_ats = false;
>>> + vm->bulk_moveable = true;
>>>
>>> if (vm_context == AMDGPU_VM_CONTEXT_COMPUTE) {
>>> vm->use_cpu_for_update = !!(adev->vm_manager.vm_update_mode &
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.h
>>> index 67a15d4..bbdde40 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_vm.h
>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/rbtree.h>
>>> #include <drm/gpu_scheduler.h>
>>> #include <drm/drm_file.h>
>>> +#include <drm/ttm/ttm_bo_driver.h>
>>>
>>> #include "amdgpu_sync.h"
>>> #include "amdgpu_ring.h"
>>> @@ -226,6 +227,11 @@ struct amdgpu_vm {
>>>
>>> /* Some basic info about the task */
>>> struct amdgpu_task_info task_info;
>>> +
>>> + /* Store positions of group of BOs */
>>> + struct ttm_lru_bulk_move lru_bulk_move;
>>> + /* mark whether can do the bulk move */
>>> + bool bulk_moveable;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct amdgpu_vm_manager {
>>> @@ -330,8 +336,11 @@ bool amdgpu_vm_need_pipeline_sync(struct amdgpu_ring *ring,
>>> void amdgpu_vm_check_compute_bug(struct amdgpu_device *adev);
>>>
>>> void amdgpu_vm_get_task_info(struct amdgpu_device *adev, unsigned int pasid,
>>> - struct amdgpu_task_info *task_info);
>>> + struct amdgpu_task_info *task_info);
>>
>> This change looks not related to bulk move
>>
>
> Yes, that is code style clean up to algin the first member of "(".
>
> Thanks,
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
