On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 09:34:59AM GMT, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 07/05/2024 23:45, Lucas De Marchi wrote:From: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@xxxxxxxxx> Add a helper to accumulate per-client runtime of all its exec queues. This is called every time a sched job is finished. v2: - Use guc_exec_queue_free_job() and execlist_job_free() to accumulate runtime when job is finished since xe_sched_job_completed() is not a notification that job finished. - Stop trying to update runtime from xe_exec_queue_fini() - that is redundant and may happen after xef is closed, leading to a use-after-free - Do not special case the first timestamp read: the default LRC sets CTX_TIMESTAMP to zero, so even the first sample should be a valid one. - Handle the parallel submission case by multiplying the runtime by width. Signed-off-by: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h | 9 +++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.h | 1 + drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_execlist.c | 1 + drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c | 2 ++ 5 files changed, 48 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h index 906b98fb973b..de078bdf0ab9 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device_types.h @@ -560,6 +560,15 @@ struct xe_file { struct mutex lock; } exec_queue; + /** + * @runtime: hw engine class runtime in ticks for this drm client + * + * Only stats from xe_exec_queue->lrc[0] are accumulated. For multi-lrc + * case, since all jobs run in parallel on the engines, only the stats + * from lrc[0] are sufficient. + */ + u64 runtime[XE_ENGINE_CLASS_MAX]; + /** @client: drm client */ struct xe_drm_client *client; }; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c index 395de93579fa..86eb22e22c95 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.c @@ -769,6 +769,41 @@ bool xe_exec_queue_is_idle(struct xe_exec_queue *q) q->lrc[0].fence_ctx.next_seqno - 1; } +/** + * xe_exec_queue_update_runtime() - Update runtime for this exec queue from hw + * @q: The exec queue + * + * Update the timestamp saved by HW for this exec queue and save runtime + * calculated by using the delta from last update. On multi-lrc case, only the + * first is considered. + */ +void xe_exec_queue_update_runtime(struct xe_exec_queue *q) +{ + struct xe_file *xef; + struct xe_lrc *lrc; + u32 old_ts, new_ts; + + /* + * Jobs that are run during driver load may use an exec_queue, but are + * not associated with a user xe file, so avoid accumulating busyness + * for kernel specific work. + */ + if (!q->vm || !q->vm->xef) + return; + + xef = q->vm->xef; + + /* + * Only sample the first LRC. For parallel submission, all of them are + * scheduled together and we compensate that below by multiplying by + * width + */ + lrc = &q->lrc[0]; + + new_ts = xe_lrc_update_timestamp(lrc, &old_ts); + xef->runtime[q->class] += (new_ts - old_ts) * q->width;I think in theory this could be introducing a systematic error depending on how firmware handles things and tick resolution. Or even regardless of the firmware, if the timestamps are saved on context exit by the GPU hw itself and parallel contexts do not exit 100% aligned. Undershoot would be I think fine, but systematic overshoot under constant 100% parallel load from mutlitple client could constantly show >100% class utilisation. Probably not a concern in practice but worthy a comment?
Ok... just extend the comment above? I could have looped through the LRCs to read the timestamp, but I didn't like reading them in slightly different times, which could give slight different results if they are in a running state. This way here it doesn't have this problem at the expense of "we have to trust the hw/firmware". We can switch to the loop eventually if our level of trust decreases after getting more data/test :) thanks Lucas De Marchi
Regards, Tvrtko+} + void xe_exec_queue_kill(struct xe_exec_queue *q) { struct xe_exec_queue *eq = q, *next; diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.h index 48f6da53a292..e0f07d28ee1a 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.h +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_exec_queue.h @@ -75,5 +75,6 @@ struct dma_fence *xe_exec_queue_last_fence_get(struct xe_exec_queue *e, struct xe_vm *vm); void xe_exec_queue_last_fence_set(struct xe_exec_queue *e, struct xe_vm *vm, struct dma_fence *fence); +void xe_exec_queue_update_runtime(struct xe_exec_queue *q); #endif diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_execlist.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_execlist.c index dece2785933c..a316431025c7 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_execlist.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_execlist.c @@ -307,6 +307,7 @@ static void execlist_job_free(struct drm_sched_job *drm_job) { struct xe_sched_job *job = to_xe_sched_job(drm_job); + xe_exec_queue_update_runtime(job->q); xe_sched_job_put(job); } diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c index d274a139010b..e0ebfe83dfe8 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c @@ -749,6 +749,8 @@ static void guc_exec_queue_free_job(struct drm_sched_job *drm_job) { struct xe_sched_job *job = to_xe_sched_job(drm_job); + xe_exec_queue_update_runtime(job->q); + trace_xe_sched_job_free(job); xe_sched_job_put(job); }
