Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-01-18 16:03:27) > > On 18/01/2019 14:00, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Our goal is to remove struct_mutex and replace it with fine grained > > locking. One of the thorny issues is our eviction logic for reclaiming > > space for an execbuffer (or GTT mmaping, among a few other examples). > > While eviction itself is easy to move under a per-VM mutex, performing > > the activity tracking is less agreeable. One solution is not to do any > > MRU tracking and do a simple coarse evaluation during eviction of > > active/inactive, with a loose temporal ordering of last > > insertion/evaluation. That keeps all the locking constrained to when we > > are manipulating the VM itself, neatly avoiding the tricky handling of > > possible recursive locking during execbuf and elsewhere. > > > > Note that discarding the MRU is unlikely to impact upon our efficiency > > to reclaim VM space (where we think a LRU model is best) as our > > current strategy is to use random idle replacement first before doing > > a search, and over time the use of softpinned 48b per-ppGTT is growing > > (thereby eliminating any need to perform any eviction searches, in > > theory at least). > > There is still no mention of list consolidation. "Note that discarding the MRU (currently implemented as a pair of lists, to avoid scanning the active list for a NONBLOCKING search)" Is that enough to make it clear? -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
