Quoting Mika Kuoppala (2017-10-23 12:52:11) > Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > In the idle worker we drop the prolonged GT wakeref used to cover such > > essentials as interrupt delivery. (When a CS interrupt arrives, we also > > assert that the GT is awake.) However, it turns out that 10ms is not > > long enough to be assured that the last CS interrupt has been delivered, > > so bump that to 200ms, and move the entirety of that wait to before we > > take the struct_mutex to avoid blocking. As this is now a potentially > > long wait, restore the earlier behaviour of bailing out early when a new > > request arrives. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > > index 026cb52ece0b..d3a638613857 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > > @@ -3281,8 +3281,8 @@ i915_gem_idle_work_handler(struct work_struct *work) > > { > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = > > container_of(work, typeof(*dev_priv), gt.idle_work.work); > > - struct drm_device *dev = &dev_priv->drm; > > bool rearm_hangcheck; > > + ktime_t end; > > > > if (!READ_ONCE(dev_priv->gt.awake)) > > return; > > @@ -3291,14 +3291,22 @@ i915_gem_idle_work_handler(struct work_struct *work) > > * Wait for last execlists context complete, but bail out in case a > > * new request is submitted. > > */ > > - wait_for(intel_engines_are_idle(dev_priv), 10); > > - if (READ_ONCE(dev_priv->gt.active_requests)) > > - return; > > + end = ktime_add_ms(ktime_get(), 200); > > + do { > > + if (READ_ONCE(dev_priv->gt.active_requests) || > > + work_pending(work)) > > + return; > > + > > + if (intel_engines_are_idle(dev_priv)) > > + break; > > + > > + usleep_range(100, 500); > > + } while (ktime_before(ktime_get(), end)); > > > > rearm_hangcheck = > > cancel_delayed_work_sync(&dev_priv->gpu_error.hangcheck_work); > > > > - if (!mutex_trylock(&dev->struct_mutex)) { > > + if (!mutex_trylock(&dev_priv->drm.struct_mutex)) { > > /* Currently busy, come back later */ > > mod_delayed_work(dev_priv->wq, > > &dev_priv->gt.idle_work, > > @@ -3310,13 +3318,14 @@ i915_gem_idle_work_handler(struct work_struct *work) > > * New request retired after this work handler started, extend active > > * period until next instance of the work. > > */ > > - if (work_pending(work)) > > + if (dev_priv->gt.active_requests || work_pending(work)) > > goto out_unlock; > > > > In here there might be some value of introducing helper > for gt_work_pending as you could use it in early bailout and > in here. You would get one superfluous READ_ONCE by having that inside > the helper but in idle work it doesnt matter. > > I think it would read better too. But as it is in bikesched > department. Read better depends on finding the right name. new_requests_since_last_retire()? -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx