On 03/09/2017 08:50 AM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 09/03/2017 08:42, Oscar Mateo wrote:
On 03/09/2017 02:05 AM, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
In order to ensure no missed interrupts we must first re-direct
the interrupts to GuC, and only then re-submit the requests to
be replayed after a GPU reset. Otherwise context switch can fire
before GuC has been set up to receive it triggering more hangs.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Sagar Arun Kamble <sagar.a.kamble@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Arkadiusz Hiler <arkadiusz.hiler@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c | 58
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c | 47
------------------------
2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
index beb38e30d0e9..5b8ec0fab563 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_guc_submission.c
@@ -936,6 +936,52 @@ static void guc_reset_wq(struct i915_guc_client
*client)
client->wq_tail = 0;
}
<SNIP>
int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
{
struct intel_guc *guc = &dev_priv->guc;
@@ -953,13 +999,17 @@ int i915_guc_submission_enable(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
/* Take over from manual control of ELSP (execlists) */
for_each_engine(engine, dev_priv, id) {
- const int wqi_size = sizeof(struct guc_wq_item);
- struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq;
-
engine->submit_request = i915_guc_submit;
engine->schedule = NULL;
+ }
+
+ guc_interrupts_capture(dev_priv);
+
+ /* Replay the current set of previously submitted requests */
+ for_each_engine(engine, dev_priv, id) {
+ const int wqi_size = sizeof(struct guc_wq_item);
+ struct drm_i915_gem_request *rq;
Don't you want to move the guc_interrupts_release to
i915_guc_submission_disable as well?
I can't spot anything broken in that path. We never go in that
direction with the live submission so why do you think it is needed?
Regards,
Tvrtko
Just code symmetry: if we are leaving i915_guc_submission_enable to
capture the interrupts, why doesn't the disable also releases them?
Maybe it's not very important now, but it makes a lot more sense with my
series to do proper unwinding of the whole path (I can tackle it there
if you prefer).
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
