On 03/05/2017 12:37, Chris Wilson wrote:
If we do not require to perform priority bumping, and we haven't yet
submitted the request, we can update its priority in situ and skip
acquiring the engine locks -- thus avoiding any contention between us
and submit/execute.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 11 +++++++++++
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index fb0025627676..ca7f28795e2d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -767,6 +767,17 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request, int prio)
list_safe_reset_next(dep, p, dfs_link);
}
+ /* If we didn't need to bump any existing priorites, and we haven't
priorities
+ * yet submitted this request (i..e there is no porential race with
potential
+ * execlists_submit_request()), we can set our own priority and skip
+ * acquiring the engine locks.
+ */
+ if (request->priotree.priority == INT_MIN) {
+ request->priotree.priority = prio;
+ if (stack.dfs_link.next == stack.dfs_link.prev)
+ return;
Move the assignment of the priority under the if?
+ }
+
engine = request->engine;
spin_lock_irq(&engine->timeline->lock);
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
