Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/i915/gt: create workqueue dedicated to wake references

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 12/05/2023 10:54, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
On Fri, 2023-05-12 at 10:32 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 12/05/2023 10:10, Coelho, Luciano wrote:
On Fri, 2023-05-12 at 10:04 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 11/05/2023 09:20, Luca Coelho wrote:
Add a work queue in the intel_wakeref structure to be used exclusively
by the wake reference mechanism.  This is needed in order to avoid
using the system workqueue and relying on flush_scheduled_work().

Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx>
---
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c |  7 ++++++-
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.c | 15 ++++++++++++--
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.h |  3 ++-
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/mock_engine.c     |  8 +++++++-
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c      | 21 ++++++++++++++-----
    drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.h      | 25 +++++++++++++++--------
    6 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
index 0aff5bb13c53..6505bfa70cd0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_cs.c
@@ -1290,7 +1290,11 @@ static int engine_setup_common(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    		goto err_cmd_parser;
intel_engine_init_execlists(engine);
-	intel_engine_init__pm(engine);
+
+	err = intel_engine_init__pm(engine);
+	if (err)
+		goto err_cmd_parser;
+
    	intel_engine_init_retire(engine);
/* Use the whole device by default */
@@ -1525,6 +1529,7 @@ void intel_engine_cleanup_common(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    {
    	GEM_BUG_ON(!list_empty(&engine->sched_engine->requests));
+ intel_engine_destroy__pm(engine);
    	i915_sched_engine_put(engine->sched_engine);
    	intel_breadcrumbs_put(engine->breadcrumbs);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.c
index ee531a5c142c..859b62cf660f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.c
@@ -294,14 +294,25 @@ static const struct intel_wakeref_ops wf_ops = {
    	.put = __engine_park,
    };
-void intel_engine_init__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+int intel_engine_init__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    {
    	struct intel_runtime_pm *rpm = engine->uncore->rpm;
+	int err;
+
+	err = intel_wakeref_init(&engine->wakeref, rpm, &wf_ops);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
- intel_wakeref_init(&engine->wakeref, rpm, &wf_ops);
    	intel_engine_init_heartbeat(engine);
intel_gsc_idle_msg_enable(engine);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+void intel_engine_destroy__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
+{
+	intel_wakeref_destroy(&engine->wakeref);
    }
/**
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.h
index d68675925b79..e8568f7d10c6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine_pm.h
@@ -104,7 +104,8 @@ intel_engine_create_kernel_request(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    	return rq;
    }
-void intel_engine_init__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
+int intel_engine_init__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
+void intel_engine_destroy__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine);
void intel_engine_reset_pinned_contexts(struct intel_engine_cs *engine); diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/mock_engine.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/mock_engine.c
index c0637bf799a3..0a3c702c21e2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/mock_engine.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/mock_engine.c
@@ -336,6 +336,7 @@ static void mock_engine_release(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    	intel_context_put(engine->kernel_context);
intel_engine_fini_retire(engine);
+	intel_engine_destroy__pm(engine);
    }
struct intel_engine_cs *mock_engine(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
@@ -393,6 +394,7 @@ struct intel_engine_cs *mock_engine(struct drm_i915_private *i915,
    int mock_engine_init(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    {
    	struct intel_context *ce;
+	int err;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&engine->pinned_contexts_list); @@ -402,7 +404,11 @@ int mock_engine_init(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
    	engine->sched_engine->private_data = engine;
intel_engine_init_execlists(engine);
-	intel_engine_init__pm(engine);
+
+	err = intel_engine_init__pm(engine);
+	if (err)
+		return err;
+
    	intel_engine_init_retire(engine);
engine->breadcrumbs = intel_breadcrumbs_create(NULL);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
index dfd87d082218..6bae609e1312 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_wakeref.c
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ void __intel_wakeref_put_last(struct intel_wakeref *wf, unsigned long flags)
/* Assume we are not in process context and so cannot sleep. */
    	if (flags & INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_ASYNC || !mutex_trylock(&wf->mutex)) {
-		mod_delayed_work(system_wq, &wf->work,
+		mod_delayed_work(wf->wq, &wf->work,
    				 FIELD_GET(INTEL_WAKEREF_PUT_DELAY, flags));
    		return;
    	}
@@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static void __intel_wakeref_put_work(struct work_struct *wrk)
    	____intel_wakeref_put_last(wf);
    }
-void __intel_wakeref_init(struct intel_wakeref *wf,
-			  struct intel_runtime_pm *rpm,
-			  const struct intel_wakeref_ops *ops,
-			  struct intel_wakeref_lockclass *key)
+int __intel_wakeref_init(struct intel_wakeref *wf,
+			 struct intel_runtime_pm *rpm,
+			 const struct intel_wakeref_ops *ops,
+			 struct intel_wakeref_lockclass *key)
    {
    	wf->rpm = rpm;
    	wf->ops = ops;
@@ -105,9 +105,20 @@ void __intel_wakeref_init(struct intel_wakeref *wf,
    	atomic_set(&wf->count, 0);
    	wf->wakeref = 0;
+ wf->wq = alloc_workqueue("i1915-wakeref", 0, 0);

Typo here -

Oh, good catch! This is one of my "favorite" typos, for some reason.

Yes, I had the same one. :) Patch 3/3 too.

   I wanted to ask however - why does this particular wq
"deserves" to be dedicated and can't just use one of the
drm_i915_private ones?

It's because there's no easy way to get access to the drm_i915_private
structure from here.  And I don't think this work needs to be in sync
with the rest of the works in i915.

Yeah I don't think it needs to be synchronised either. Was just thinking
if we really need to be creating a bunch of separate workqueues (one per
engine) for not much use, or instead could just add a backpointer to
either intel_wakeref or intel_runtime_pm. Latter already has rpm->kdev
so could plausably be replaced with rpm->i915.

Actually, looking at intel_runtime_pm_init_early, you could get to i915
via wf->rpm and container_of.

Yeah, I considered that, but using container_of() can be problematic
when we're not sure where exactly the element is coming from.  My worry
was this:

int intel_engine_init__pm(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
{
	struct intel_runtime_pm *rpm = engine->uncore->rpm;
	int err;

	err = intel_wakeref_init(&engine->wakeref, rpm, &wf_ops);
[...]
}

In this case, we're getting to __intel_wakeref_init() with an *rpm that
is coming from an intel_uncore structure and not from
drm_i915_private...

Right. Yes I agree that would be a flaky/questionable design, even if it worked in practice. I'd just replace rpm->dev with rpm->i915 then. Not feeling *that* strongly about it, but it just feels a waste to create a bunch of workqueues for this.

Regards,

Tvrtko



[Index of Archives]     [AMD Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux