Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> In order to keep the memory allocated for requests reasonably tight, try
> to reuse the oldest request (so long as it is completed and has no
> external references) for the next allocation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c
> index 9e9aa6b725f7..ee1189c35509 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c
> @@ -226,6 +226,13 @@ __i915_gem_request_alloc(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + if (!list_empty(&engine->request_list)) {
> + req = list_first_entry(&engine->request_list,
> + typeof(*req), list);
> + if (i915_gem_request_completed(req))
> + i915_gem_request_retire(req);
> + }
> +
With the last_submitted_seqno and req->seqno you could get rough
estimation of requests-in-flight and perhaps retire handful more
if the diff is very big?
But one-for-one makes sense.
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxx>
> req = kmem_cache_zalloc(dev_priv->requests, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!req)
> return -ENOMEM;
> --
> 2.8.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
