On 14/11/2019 22:57, Chris Wilson wrote:
Our callers fall into two categories, those passing timeout=0 who just
want to flush request retirements and those passing a timeout that need
to wait for submission completion (e.g. intel_gt_wait_for_idle()).
Currently, we only wait for a snapshot of timelines at the start of the
wait (but there was an expection that new requests would cause timelines
expectation? exception?
to appear at the end). However, our callers, such as
intel_gt_wait_for_idle() before suspend, do require us to wait for the
power management requests emitted by retirement as well. If we don't,
then it takes an extra second or two for the background worker to flush
the queue and mark the GT as idle.
So with this change wait_for_idle waits for the kernel context to get
retired as well. And you say that's faster by a second or two? Which
flush gets so much slower, I mean from where, if we don't wait here?
Regards,
Tvrtko
Fixes: 7e8057626640 ("drm/i915: Drop struct_mutex from around i915_retire_requests()")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c | 11 +++--------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
index b73229a84d85..ccbddddbbd52 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_requests.c
@@ -33,7 +33,6 @@ long intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout(struct intel_gt *gt, long timeout)
{
struct intel_gt_timelines *timelines = >->timelines;
struct intel_timeline *tl, *tn;
- unsigned long active_count = 0;
unsigned long flags;
bool interruptible;
LIST_HEAD(free);
@@ -46,10 +45,8 @@ long intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout(struct intel_gt *gt, long timeout)
spin_lock_irqsave(&timelines->lock, flags);
list_for_each_entry_safe(tl, tn, &timelines->active_list, link) {
- if (!mutex_trylock(&tl->mutex)) {
- active_count++; /* report busy to caller, try again? */
+ if (!mutex_trylock(&tl->mutex))
continue;
- }
intel_timeline_get(tl);
GEM_BUG_ON(!tl->active_count);
@@ -74,9 +71,7 @@ long intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout(struct intel_gt *gt, long timeout)
/* Resume iteration after dropping lock */
list_safe_reset_next(tl, tn, link);
- if (--tl->active_count)
- active_count += !!rcu_access_pointer(tl->last_request.fence);
- else
+ if (!--tl->active_count)
list_del(&tl->link);
mutex_unlock(&tl->mutex);
@@ -92,7 +87,7 @@ long intel_gt_retire_requests_timeout(struct intel_gt *gt, long timeout)
list_for_each_entry_safe(tl, tn, &free, link)
__intel_timeline_free(&tl->kref);
- return active_count ? timeout : 0;
+ return list_empty(&timelines->active_list) ? 0 : timeout;
}
int intel_gt_wait_for_idle(struct intel_gt *gt, long timeout)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
