On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 03:50:44PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 08:08:34AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Currently we install a callback for performing poll on a dma-buf, > > irrespective of the timeout. This involves taking a spinlock, as well as > > unnecessary work, and greatly reduces scaling of poll(.timeout=0) across > > multiple threads. > > > > We can query whether the poll will block prior to installing the > > callback to make the busy-query fast. > > > > Single thread: 60% faster > > 8 threads on 4 (+4 HT) cores: 600% faster > > > > Still not quite the perfect scaling we get with a native busy ioctl, but > > poll(dmabuf) is faster due to the quicker lookup of the object and > > avoiding drm_ioctl(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: linux-media@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: linaro-mm-sig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx> > > Need to strike the r-b here, since Christian König pointed out that > objects won't magically switch signalling on. The point being here that we don't even want to switch signaling on! :) Christian's point was that not all fences guarantee forward progress irrespective of whether signaling is enabled or not, and fences are not required to guarantee forward progress without signaling even if they provide an ops->signaled(). -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
