Asynchronous eviction [WAS Re: [PATCH] drm/ttm: add minimum residency constraint for bo eviction]

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

 



On 11/29/2012 10:58 PM, Marek Olšák wrote:

What I tried to point out was that the synchronization shouldn't be
needed, because the CPU shouldn't do anything with the contents of
evicted buffers. The GPU moves the buffers, not the CPU. What does the
CPU do besides updating some kernel structures?

Also, buffer deletion is something where you don't need to wait for
the buffer to become idle if you know the memory area won't be
mapped by the CPU, ever. The memory can be reclaimed right away. It
would be the GPU to move new data in and once that happens, the old
buffer will be trivially idle, because single-ring GPUs execute
commands in order.

Marek

Actually asynchronous eviction / deletion is something I have been prototyping for a while but never gotten around to implement in TTM:

There are a few minor caveats:

With buffer deletion, what you say is true for fixed memory, but not for TT memory where pages are reclaimed by the system after buffer destruction. That means that we don't have to wait for idle to free GPU space, but we need to wait before pages are handed back to the system.

Swapout needs to access the contents of evicted buffers, but synchronizing doesn't need to happen until just before swapout.

Multi-ring - CPU support: If another ring / engine or the CPU is about to move in buffer contents to VRAM or a GPU aperture that was previously evicted by another ring, it needs to sync with that eviction, but doesn't know what buffer or even which buffers occupied the space previously. Trivially one can attach a sync object to the memory type manager that represents the last eviction from that memory type, and *any* engine (CPU or GPU) that moves buffer contents in needs to order that movement with respect to that fence. As you say, with a single ring and no CPU fallbacks, that ordering is a no-op, but any common (non-driver based) implementation needs to support this.

A single fence attached to the memory type manager is the simplest solution, but a solution with a fence for each free region in the free list is also possible. Then TTM needs a driver callback to be able order fences w r t echother.

/Thomas



_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel



[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux