Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drm/vc4: Use DRM Execution Contexts

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

 



On 12/12, Maíra Canal wrote:
> VC4 has internal copies of `drm_gem_lock_reservations()` and
> `drm_gem_unlock_reservations()` inside the driver and ideally, we should
> move those hard-coded functions to the generic functions provided by DRM.
> But, instead of using the DRM GEM functions to (un)lock reservations, move
> the new DRM Execution Contexts API.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig   |  1 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c | 99 ++++++++---------------------------
>  2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> index c5f30b317698..0627e826fda4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/Kconfig
> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ config DRM_VC4
>  	select DRM_DISPLAY_HDMI_HELPER
>  	select DRM_DISPLAY_HDMI_STATE_HELPER
>  	select DRM_DISPLAY_HELPER
> +	select DRM_EXEC
>  	select DRM_KMS_HELPER
>  	select DRM_GEM_DMA_HELPER
>  	select DRM_PANEL_BRIDGE
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> index 22bccd69eb62..1021f45cb53c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/vc4/vc4_gem.c
> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
>  #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
>  #include <linux/dma-fence-array.h>
>  
> +#include <drm/drm_exec.h>
>  #include <drm/drm_syncobj.h>
>  
>  #include "uapi/drm/vc4_drm.h"
> @@ -578,19 +579,6 @@ vc4_update_bo_seqnos(struct vc4_exec_info *exec, uint64_t seqno)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static void
> -vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> -			   struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> -			   struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx)
> -{
> -	int i;
> -
> -	for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++)
> -		dma_resv_unlock(exec->bo[i]->resv);
> -
> -	ww_acquire_fini(acquire_ctx);
> -}
> -
>  /* Takes the reservation lock on all the BOs being referenced, so that
>   * at queue submit time we can update the reservations.
>   *
> @@ -599,70 +587,23 @@ vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
>   * to vc4, so we don't attach dma-buf fences to them.
>   */
>  static int
> -vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
> -			 struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> -			 struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx)
> +vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> +			 struct drm_exec *exec_ctx)
>  {
> -	int contended_lock = -1;
> -	int i, ret;
> -	struct drm_gem_object *bo;
> -
> -	ww_acquire_init(acquire_ctx, &reservation_ww_class);
> -
> -retry:
> -	if (contended_lock != -1) {
> -		bo = exec->bo[contended_lock];
> -		ret = dma_resv_lock_slow_interruptible(bo->resv, acquire_ctx);
> -		if (ret) {
> -			ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> -			return ret;
> -		}
> -	}
> -
> -	for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++) {
> -		if (i == contended_lock)
> -			continue;
> -
> -		bo = exec->bo[i];
> -
> -		ret = dma_resv_lock_interruptible(bo->resv, acquire_ctx);
> -		if (ret) {
> -			int j;
> -
> -			for (j = 0; j < i; j++) {
> -				bo = exec->bo[j];
> -				dma_resv_unlock(bo->resv);
> -			}
> -
> -			if (contended_lock != -1 && contended_lock >= i) {
> -				bo = exec->bo[contended_lock];
> -
> -				dma_resv_unlock(bo->resv);
> -			}
> -
> -			if (ret == -EDEADLK) {
> -				contended_lock = i;
> -				goto retry;
> -			}
> -
> -			ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> -			return ret;
> -		}
> -	}
> -
> -	ww_acquire_done(acquire_ctx);
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	/* Reserve space for our shared (read-only) fence references,
>  	 * before we commit the CL to the hardware.
>  	 */
> -	for (i = 0; i < exec->bo_count; i++) {
> -		bo = exec->bo[i];
> +	drm_exec_init(exec_ctx, DRM_EXEC_INTERRUPTIBLE_WAIT, exec->bo_count);
> +	drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec_ctx) {
> +		ret = drm_exec_prepare_array(exec_ctx, exec->bo,
> +					     exec->bo_count, 1);

Hi Maíra,

So, I'm not familiar too drm_exec, but the original implementation of
vc4_lock_bo_reservations() has a retry of locks from the contention and
I don't see it inside the drm_exec_prepare_array(), why don't use the
loop drm_exec_prepare_obj() plus drm_exec_retry_on_contention() (similar
to the typical usage documented for drm_exec)?

Also, probably you already considered that: we can extend this update to
v3d, right?

Melissa

> +	}
>  
> -		ret = dma_resv_reserve_fences(bo->resv, 1);
> -		if (ret) {
> -			vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, acquire_ctx);
> -			return ret;
> -		}
> +	if (ret) {
> +		drm_exec_fini(exec_ctx);
> +		return ret;
>  	}
>  
>  	return 0;
> @@ -679,7 +620,7 @@ vc4_lock_bo_reservations(struct drm_device *dev,
>   */
>  static int
>  vc4_queue_submit(struct drm_device *dev, struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
> -		 struct ww_acquire_ctx *acquire_ctx,
> +		 struct drm_exec *exec_ctx,
>  		 struct drm_syncobj *out_sync)
>  {
>  	struct vc4_dev *vc4 = to_vc4_dev(dev);
> @@ -708,7 +649,7 @@ vc4_queue_submit(struct drm_device *dev, struct vc4_exec_info *exec,
>  
>  	vc4_update_bo_seqnos(exec, seqno);
>  
> -	vc4_unlock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, acquire_ctx);
> +	drm_exec_fini(exec_ctx);
>  
>  	list_add_tail(&exec->head, &vc4->bin_job_list);
>  
> @@ -1123,7 +1064,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  	struct drm_vc4_submit_cl *args = data;
>  	struct drm_syncobj *out_sync = NULL;
>  	struct vc4_exec_info *exec;
> -	struct ww_acquire_ctx acquire_ctx;
> +	struct drm_exec exec_ctx;
>  	struct dma_fence *in_fence;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> @@ -1216,7 +1157,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto fail;
>  
> -	ret = vc4_lock_bo_reservations(dev, exec, &acquire_ctx);
> +	ret = vc4_lock_bo_reservations(exec, &exec_ctx);
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto fail;
>  
> @@ -1224,7 +1165,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  		out_sync = drm_syncobj_find(file_priv, args->out_sync);
>  		if (!out_sync) {
>  			ret = -EINVAL;
> -			goto fail;
> +			goto fail_unreserve;
>  		}
>  
>  		/* We replace the fence in out_sync in vc4_queue_submit since
> @@ -1239,7 +1180,7 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  	 */
>  	exec->args = NULL;
>  
> -	ret = vc4_queue_submit(dev, exec, &acquire_ctx, out_sync);
> +	ret = vc4_queue_submit(dev, exec, &exec_ctx, out_sync);
>  
>  	/* The syncobj isn't part of the exec data and we need to free our
>  	 * reference even if job submission failed.
> @@ -1248,13 +1189,15 @@ vc4_submit_cl_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  		drm_syncobj_put(out_sync);
>  
>  	if (ret)
> -		goto fail;
> +		goto fail_unreserve;
>  
>  	/* Return the seqno for our job. */
>  	args->seqno = vc4->emit_seqno;
>  
>  	return 0;
>  
> +fail_unreserve:
> +	drm_exec_fini(&exec_ctx);
>  fail:
>  	vc4_complete_exec(&vc4->base, exec);
>  
> -- 
> 2.47.1
> 



[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