On 07/05/2018 14:57, Chris Wilson wrote:
Bypass using the tasklet to submit the first request to HW, as the
tasklet may be deferred unto ksoftirqd and at a minimum will add in
excess of 10us (and maybe tens of milliseconds) to our execution
latency. This latency reduction is most notable when execution flows
between engines.
v2: Beware handling preemption completion from the direct submit path as
well.
Suggested-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c | 12 +++-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++----
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h | 7 +++
3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
index 2feb65096966..6bfe30af7826 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
@@ -754,14 +754,20 @@ static bool __guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
static void guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
- unsigned long flags;
+ unsigned long uninitialized_var(flags);
bool submit;
local_irq_save(flags);
- spin_lock(&engine->timeline.lock);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_RUN,
+ &engine->execlists.tasklet.state));
Soon it will be time for i915_tasklet. :)
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_lock(&engine->timeline.lock);
A bit ugly both on the conditional locking and using engine->flags for
transient purposes.
Since you are locking the tasklet and own it (and open coding the call)
completely when calling directly, you could just the same cheat and call
a different function?
+
submit = __guc_dequeue(engine);
- spin_unlock(&engine->timeline.lock);
+
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_unlock(&engine->timeline.lock);
if (submit)
guc_submit(engine);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index 15c373ea5b7e..ac7c5edee4ee 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -357,13 +357,16 @@ execlists_unwind_incomplete_requests(struct intel_engine_execlists *execlists)
{
struct intel_engine_cs *engine =
container_of(execlists, typeof(*engine), execlists);
- unsigned long flags;
+ unsigned long uninitialized_var(flags);
- spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_RUN, &execlists->tasklet.state));
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
__unwind_incomplete_requests(engine);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
Hm ok yes, this one would be a problem..
Maybe at least use some bit under execlists state instead of engine flags?
Regards,
Tvrtko
}
static inline void
@@ -602,6 +605,8 @@ static bool __execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
*/
GEM_BUG_ON(!execlists_is_active(execlists,
EXECLISTS_ACTIVE_USER));
+ GEM_BUG_ON(execlists_is_active(execlists,
+ EXECLISTS_ACTIVE_PREEMPT));
GEM_BUG_ON(!port_count(&port[0]));
if (port_count(&port[0]) > 1)
return false;
@@ -758,12 +763,17 @@ static bool __execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
static void execlists_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists = &engine->execlists;
- unsigned long flags;
+ unsigned long uninitialized_var(flags);
bool submit;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!test_bit(TASKLET_STATE_RUN, &execlists->tasklet.state));
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
+
submit = __execlists_dequeue(engine);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
+
+ if (!intel_engine_direct_submit(engine))
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
if (submit)
execlists_submit_ports(engine);
@@ -1163,16 +1173,45 @@ static void queue_request(struct intel_engine_cs *engine,
&lookup_priolist(engine, node, prio)->requests);
}
-static void __submit_queue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
+static void __wakeup_queue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
{
engine->execlists.queue_priority = prio;
+}
+
+static void __schedule_queue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+{
tasklet_hi_schedule(&engine->execlists.tasklet);
}
+static void __submit_queue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+{
+ struct intel_engine_execlists * const execlists = &engine->execlists;
+ struct tasklet_struct * const t = &execlists->tasklet;
+
+ GEM_BUG_ON(!engine->i915->gt.awake);
+
+ /* If inside GPU reset, the tasklet will be queued later. */
+ if (unlikely(atomic_read(&t->count)))
+ return;
+
+ /* Directly submit the first request to reduce the initial latency */
+ if (!port_isset(execlists->port) && tasklet_trylock(t)) {
+ engine->flags |= I915_ENGINE_DIRECT_SUBMIT;
+ t->func(t->data);
+ engine->flags &= ~I915_ENGINE_DIRECT_SUBMIT;
+ tasklet_unlock(t);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ __schedule_queue(engine);
+}
+
static void submit_queue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine, int prio)
{
- if (prio > engine->execlists.queue_priority)
- __submit_queue(engine, prio);
+ if (prio > engine->execlists.queue_priority) {
+ __wakeup_queue(engine, prio);
+ __submit_queue(engine);
+ }
}
static void execlists_submit_request(struct i915_request *request)
@@ -1184,10 +1223,9 @@ static void execlists_submit_request(struct i915_request *request)
spin_lock_irqsave(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
queue_request(engine, &request->sched, rq_prio(request));
- submit_queue(engine, rq_prio(request));
-
GEM_BUG_ON(!engine->execlists.first);
GEM_BUG_ON(list_empty(&request->sched.link));
+ submit_queue(engine, rq_prio(request));
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&engine->timeline.lock, flags);
}
@@ -1309,8 +1347,10 @@ static void execlists_schedule(struct i915_request *request,
}
if (prio > engine->execlists.queue_priority &&
- i915_sw_fence_done(&sched_to_request(node)->submit))
- __submit_queue(engine, prio);
+ i915_sw_fence_done(&sched_to_request(node)->submit)) {
+ __wakeup_queue(engine, prio);
+ __schedule_queue(engine);
+ }
}
spin_unlock_irq(&engine->timeline.lock);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h
index 010750e8ee44..f5545391d76a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_ringbuffer.h
@@ -569,6 +569,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs {
#define I915_ENGINE_NEEDS_CMD_PARSER BIT(0)
#define I915_ENGINE_SUPPORTS_STATS BIT(1)
#define I915_ENGINE_HAS_PREEMPTION BIT(2)
+#define I915_ENGINE_DIRECT_SUBMIT BIT(3)
unsigned int flags;
/*
@@ -646,6 +647,12 @@ intel_engine_has_preemption(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
return engine->flags & I915_ENGINE_HAS_PREEMPTION;
}
+static inline bool
+intel_engine_direct_submit(const struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+{
+ return engine->flags & I915_ENGINE_DIRECT_SUBMIT;
+}
+
static inline bool __execlists_need_preempt(int prio, int last)
{
return prio > max(0, last);
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx