On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 01:16:13PM +0200, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Op 2021-05-26 om 18:37 schreef Daniel Vetter: > > Media userspace was the last userspace to still use them, and they > > converted now too: > > > > https://github.com/intel/media-driver/commit/144020c37770083974bedf59902b70b8f444c799 > > > > This means no reason anymore to make relocations faster than they've > > been for the first 9 years of gem. This code was added in > > > > commit 7dd4f6729f9243bd7046c6f04c107a456bda38eb > > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Jun 16 15:05:24 2017 +0100 > > > > drm/i915: Async GPU relocation processing > > > > Furthermore there's pretty strong indications it's buggy, since the > > code to use it by default as the only option had to be reverted: > > > > commit ad5d95e4d538737ed3fa25493777decf264a3011 > > Author: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Tue Sep 8 15:41:17 2020 +1000 > > > > Revert "drm/i915/gem: Async GPU relocations only" > > > > This code just disables gpu relocations, leaving the garbage > > collection for later patches and more importantly, much less confusing > > diff. Also given how much headaches this code has caused in the past, > > letting this soak for a bit seems justified. > > > > Cc: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Cc: "Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Jason Ekstrand <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 43 ++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > Reviewed-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Note that a lot of complexity may be removed with gpu relocations gone. > Some igt tests might also start to fail, as they expect relocations to > complete asynchronously. Yeah I have the kernel side patch for that, at least in the execbuf code + selftests. For igt I'm wawiting on CI to tell me what I all need to look at and decide what to do with it. > Is it kept in case we need to revive it? I don't want to revive it, but I want to split the huge code changes from the functional changes at least. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch
