Re: amdgpu doesn't do implicit sync, requires drivers to do it in IBs

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

 



Am 28.05.20 um 12:06 schrieb Michel Dänzer:
On 2020-05-28 11:11 a.m., Christian König wrote:
Well we still need implicit sync [...]
Yeah, this isn't about "we don't want implicit sync", it's about "amdgpu
doesn't ensure later jobs fully see the effects of previous implicitly
synced jobs", requiring userspace to do pessimistic flushing.

Yes, exactly that.

For the background: We also do this flushing for explicit syncs. And when this was implemented 2-3 years ago we first did the flushing for implicit sync as well.

That was immediately reverted and then implemented differently because it caused severe performance problems in some use cases.

I'm not sure of the root cause of this performance problems. My assumption was always that we then insert to many pipeline syncs, but Marek doesn't seem to think it could be that.

On the one hand I'm rather keen to remove the extra handling and just always use the explicit handling for everything because it simplifies the kernel code quite a bit. On the other hand I don't want to run into this performance problem again.

Additional to that what the kernel does is a "full" pipeline sync, e.g. we busy wait for the full hardware pipeline to drain. That might be overkill if you just want to do some flushing so that the next shader sees the stuff written, but I'm not an expert on that.

Regards,
Christian.
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux