On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 15:53 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote: > On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 15:40 +0200, Thomas Hellström wrote: > > Hi, Christian, > > > > On Wed, 2024-07-03 at 15:25 +0200, Christian König wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > We recently ran into a problem with deadlocks during eviction and > > > while back Thomas worked on a patch set which was going into the > > > direction of solving this. > > > > > > So I simplified it to just the functionality needed to resolve > > > this > > > issue at. The resulting patch set is just the initial first step > > > of > > > using drm_exec in TTM for locking BOs during eviction. > > > > > > Should a deadlock happen the drm_exec object is now used to > > > resolve > > > it and prelock the contended object. This approach solves this > > > the > > > ENOMEM issue on contending evictions quite nicely. > > > > > > Please review and comment, > > > Christian. > > > > Overall it looks sane, but I think it makes sense to review and > > land > > the part of the shrinker series first that touches this eviction > > path > > and gets rid of a lot of code that's hard to understand and > > simplifies > > the locking a lot. (That part doesn't touch drm_exec), and it has > > been > > pending reviews for some time. > > > > I don't think it's correct to bypass that. Then we could work out > > the > > drm_exec implications. > > It's > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/131815/ > > And in particular patch 7 there brings in the restartable LRU > functionality and sipmlifies eviction immensely and would make the > usage of this patchset's rudimentary drm_exec support easier to > understand and review. > > /Thomas Hm. I actually think all review comments have been sorted out up to that patch, so what's missing is a resend of the new version, RB from Matt and Review / Ack from you, then that part could be partially merged. /Thomas > > > > > > /Thomas > > > > > > > > > > > > >
