Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc/slpc: Use non-blocking H2G for waitboost

["Belgaumkar, Vinay" <vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/5/2022 5:13 AM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> On 05/05/2022 06:40, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
> > SLPC min/max frequency updates require H2G calls. We are seeing
> > timeouts when GuC channel is backed up and it is unable to respond
> > in a timely fashion causing warnings and affecting CI.
>
> Is it the "Unable to force min freq" error? Do you have a link to the 
> GitLab issue to add to commit message?
We don't have a specific error for this one, but have seen similar 
issues with other H2G which are blocking.
> > This is seen when waitboosting happens during a stress test.
> > this patch updates the waitboost path to use a non-blocking
> > H2G call instead, which returns as soon as the message is
> > successfully transmitted.
>
> AFAIU with this approach, when CT channel is congested, you instead 
> achieve silent dropping of the waitboost request, right?
We are hoping it makes it, but just not waiting for it to complete.
> It sounds like a potentially important feedback from the field to lose 
> so easily. How about you added drm_notice to the worker when it fails?
>
> Or simply a "one line patch" to replace i915_probe_error (!?) with 
> drm_notice and keep the blocking behavior. (I have no idea what is the 
> typical time to drain the CT buffer, and so to decide whether waiting 
> or dropping makes more sense for effectiveness of waitboosting.)
>
> Or since the congestion /should not/ happen in production, then the 
> argument is why complicate with more code, in which case going with 
> one line patch is an easy way forward?

Even if we soften the blow here, the actual timeout error occurs in the 
intel_guc_ct.c code, so we cannot hide that error anyways. Making this 
call non-blocking will achieve both things.

Thanks,

Vinay.

> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
> > Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++-----
> >   1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c 
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> > index 1db833da42df..c852f73cf521 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> > @@ -98,6 +98,30 @@ static u32 slpc_get_state(struct intel_guc_slpc 
> > *slpc)
> >       return data->header.global_state;
> >   }
> >   +static int guc_action_slpc_set_param_nb(struct intel_guc *guc, u8 
> > id, u32 value)
> > +{
> > +    u32 request[] = {
> > +        GUC_ACTION_HOST2GUC_PC_SLPC_REQUEST,
> > +        SLPC_EVENT(SLPC_EVENT_PARAMETER_SET, 2),
> > +        id,
> > +        value,
> > +    };
> > +    int ret;
> > +
> > +    ret = intel_guc_send_nb(guc, request, ARRAY_SIZE(request), 0);
> > +
> > +    return ret > 0 ? -EPROTO : ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int slpc_set_param_nb(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc, u8 id, u32 
> > value)
> > +{
> > +    struct intel_guc *guc = slpc_to_guc(slpc);
> > +
> > +    GEM_BUG_ON(id >= SLPC_MAX_PARAM);
> > +
> > +    return guc_action_slpc_set_param_nb(guc, id, value);
> > +}
> > +
> >   static int guc_action_slpc_set_param(struct intel_guc *guc, u8 id, 
> > u32 value)
> >   {
> >       u32 request[] = {
> > @@ -208,12 +232,10 @@ static int slpc_force_min_freq(struct 
> > intel_guc_slpc *slpc, u32 freq)
> >        */
> >         with_intel_runtime_pm(&i915->runtime_pm, wakeref) {
> > -        ret = slpc_set_param(slpc,
> > -                     SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ,
> > -                     freq);
> > -        if (ret)
> > -            i915_probe_error(i915, "Unable to force min freq to %u: 
> > %d",
> > -                     freq, ret);
> > +        /* Non-blocking request will avoid stalls */
> > +        ret = slpc_set_param_nb(slpc,
> > +                    SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ,
> > +                    freq);
> >       }
> >         return ret;
> > @@ -231,8 +253,8 @@ static void slpc_boost_work(struct work_struct 
> > *work)
> >        */
> >       mutex_lock(&slpc->lock);
> >       if (atomic_read(&slpc->num_waiters)) {
> > -        slpc_force_min_freq(slpc, slpc->boost_freq);
> > -        slpc->num_boosts++;
> > +        if (!slpc_force_min_freq(slpc, slpc->boost_freq))
> > +            slpc->num_boosts++;
> >       }
> >       mutex_unlock(&slpc->lock);
> >   }