On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 8:01 AM Sebastian Wick
<sebastian.wick@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 9:38 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 08:14:47 -0800
> > Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 12:53 AM Pekka Paalanen <ppaalanen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 13:15:49 -0800
> > > > Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > Allow userspace to use the EPOLLPRI/POLLPRI flag to indicate an urgent
> > > > > wait (as opposed to a "housekeeping" wait to know when to cleanup after
> > > > > some work has completed). Usermode components of GPU driver stacks
> > > > > often poll() on fence fd's to know when it is safe to do things like
> > > > > free or reuse a buffer, but they can also poll() on a fence fd when
> > > > > waiting to read back results from the GPU. The EPOLLPRI/POLLPRI flag
> > > > > lets the kernel differentiate these two cases.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > where would the UAPI documentation of this go?
> > > > It seems to be missing.
> > >
> > > Good question, I am not sure. The poll() man page has a description,
> > > but my usage doesn't fit that _exactly_ (but OTOH the description is a
> > > bit vague).
> > >
> > > > If a Wayland compositor is polling application fences to know which
> > > > client buffer to use in its rendering, should the compositor poll with
> > > > PRI or not? If a compositor polls with PRI, then all fences from all
> > > > applications would always be PRI. Would that be harmful somehow or
> > > > would it be beneficial?
> > >
> > > I think a compositor would rather use the deadline ioctl and then poll
> > > without PRI. Otherwise you are giving an urgency signal to the fence
> > > signaller which might not necessarily be needed.
> > >
> > > The places where I expect PRI to be useful is more in mesa (things
> > > like glFinish(), readpix, and other similar sorts of blocking APIs)
> >
> > Sounds good. Docs... ;-)
> >
> > Hmm, so a compositor should set the deadline when it processes the
> > wl_surface.commit, and not when it actually starts repainting, to give
> > time for the driver to react and the GPU to do some more work. The
> > deadline would be the time when the compositor starts its repaint, so
> > it knows if the buffer is ready or not.
>
> Technically we don't know when the commit is supposed to be shown.
> Just passing a deadline of the next possible deadline however is
> probably a good enough guess for this feature to be useful.
>
> One thing that neither API allows us to do is tell the kernel in
> advance when we're going to submit work and what the deadline for it
> is and unfortunately that work is the most timing sensitive.
Presumably you are talking about the final compositing step?
Elsewhere in this series that atomic wait-for-fences step sets the
deadline hint.
BR,
-R
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > pq
> >
> >
> > >
> > > BR,
> > > -R
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > pq
> > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c | 8 ++++++++
> > > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > index fb6ca1032885..c30b2085ee0a 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/dma-buf/sync_file.c
> > > > > @@ -192,6 +192,14 @@ static __poll_t sync_file_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct sync_file *sync_file = file->private_data;
> > > > >
> > > > > + /*
> > > > > + * The POLLPRI/EPOLLPRI flag can be used to signal that
> > > > > + * userspace wants the fence to signal ASAP, express this
> > > > > + * as an immediate deadline.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > + if (poll_requested_events(wait) & EPOLLPRI)
> > > > > + dma_fence_set_deadline(sync_file->fence, ktime_get());
> > > > > +
> > > > > poll_wait(file, &sync_file->wq, wait);
> > > > >
> > > > > if (list_empty(&sync_file->cb.node) &&
> > > >
> >
>
