Ah, thanks for the clarification! While discussion goes on about the
route you suggested, could we land these patches (after addressing the
reviews) to unblock compiling i915 on arm?
On 2022-02-01 1:25 a.m., Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 31/01/2022 17:02, Michael Cheng wrote:
Hey Tvrtko,
Are you saying when adding drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr),
this function forces an x86 code path only? If that is the case,
drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr) currently has ifdefs that
seperate out x86 and powerpc, so we can add an ifdef for arm in the
near future when needed.
No, I was noticing that the change you are making in this patch, while
it indeed fixes a build failure, it is a code path which does not get
executed on Arm at all.
So what effectively happens is a single assembly instruction gets
replaced with a function call on all integrated GPUs up to and
including Tigerlake.
That was the slightly annoying part I was referring to and asking
whether it was discussed before.
Sadly I don't think there is a super nice solution apart from
duplicating drm_clflush_virt_range as for example i915_clflush_range
and having it static inline. That would allow the integrated GPU code
path to remain of the same performance profile, while solving the Arm
problem. However it would be code duplication so might be frowned upon.
I'd be tempted to go that route but it is something which needs a bit
of discussion if that hasn't happened already.
Regards,
Tvrtko
On 2022-01-31 6:55 a.m., Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 28/01/2022 22:10, Michael Cheng wrote:
Use drm_clflush_virt_range instead of clflushopt and remove the memory
barrier, since drm_clflush_virt_range takes care of that.
Signed-off-by: Michael Cheng <michael.cheng@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 8 +++-----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
index 498b458fd784..0854276ff7ba 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -1332,10 +1332,8 @@ static void *reloc_vaddr(struct i915_vma *vma,
static void clflush_write32(u32 *addr, u32 value, unsigned int
flushes)
{
if (unlikely(flushes & (CLFLUSH_BEFORE | CLFLUSH_AFTER))) {
- if (flushes & CLFLUSH_BEFORE) {
- clflushopt(addr);
- mb();
- }
+ if (flushes & CLFLUSH_BEFORE)
+ drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr));
*addr = value;
@@ -1347,7 +1345,7 @@ static void clflush_write32(u32 *addr, u32
value, unsigned int flushes)
* to ensure ordering of clflush wrt to the system.
*/
if (flushes & CLFLUSH_AFTER)
- clflushopt(addr);
+ drm_clflush_virt_range(addr, sizeof(addr));
} else
*addr = value;
}
Slightly annoying thing here (maybe in some other patches from the
series as well) is that the change adds a function call to x86 only
code path, because relocations are not supported on discrete as per:
static in
eb_validate_vma(...)
/* Relocations are disallowed for all platforms after
TGL-LP. This
* also covers all platforms with local memory.
*/
if (entry->relocation_count &&
GRAPHICS_VER(eb->i915) >= 12 && !IS_TIGERLAKE(eb->i915))
return -EINVAL;
How acceptable would be, for the whole series, to introduce a static
inline i915 cluflush wrapper and so be able to avoid functions calls
on x86? Is this something that has been discussed and discounted
already?
Regards,
Tvrtko
P.S. Hmm I am now reminded of my really old per platform build
patches. With them you would be able to compile out large portions
of the driver when building for ARM. Probably like a 3rd if my
memory serves me right.
