On 01/25/2018 03:57 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote:
On 01/25/2018 10:59 AM, Chunming Zhou wrote:
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.
add a mutex to gerantee the allocation sequence for same domain. But
there is a possibility that
visible vram could be evicted to invisilbe, the tricky is they are
same domain manager, so which needs a special handling.
Change-Id: I260e8eb704f7b4788b071d3f641f21b242912256
Signed-off-by: Chunming Zhou <david1.zhou@xxxxxxx>
I think this is a good approach, however there are two things that IMO
needs fixing. [...]
Thinking a bit more about this, the end result would be that typical "C"
processes would get an unfair amount of GPU scheduling.
Isn't it actually a scheduler's task outside of TTM to mitigate this?
Further, TTM has had a design principle of avoiding locks held while
waiting for GPU, with the exception of buffer object reservations,
I think this would be the first violator, but a fairly harmless one.
I can see the use for it though. It would also allow scanning the LRU
lists for a suitable set of buffer objects to evict, rather than
evicting in strict LRU order...
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
