If we retire requests last, we may use a later seqno and so clear
the requests lists without clearing the active list, leading to
confusion. Hence we should retire requests first for consistency with
the early return. The order used to be important as the lifecycle for
the object on the active list was determined by request->seqno. However,
the requests themselves are now reference counted removing the
constraint from the order of retirement.
Fixes regression from
commit 1b5a433a4dd967b125131da42b89b5cc0d5b1f57
Author: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon Nov 24 18:49:42 2014 +0000
drm/i915: Convert 'i915_seqno_passed' calls into 'i915_gem_request_completed
'
and a
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1383 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_evict.c:279 i915_gem_evict_vm+0x10c/0x140()
WARN_ON(!list_empty(&vm->active_list))
Identified by updating WATCH_LISTS:
[drm:i915_verify_lists] *ERROR* blitter ring: active list not empty, but no requests
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 681 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c:2751 i915_gem_retire_requests_ring+0x149/0x230()
WARN_ON(i915_verify_lists(ring->dev))
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index 092f25cfb8d5..7a9589f38bbc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -2660,24 +2660,11 @@ i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *ring)
WARN_ON(i915_verify_lists(ring->dev));
- /* Move any buffers on the active list that are no longer referenced
- * by the ringbuffer to the flushing/inactive lists as appropriate,
- * before we free the context associated with the requests.
+ /* Retire requests first as we use it above for the early return.
+ * If we retire requests last, we may use a later seqno and so clear
+ * the requests lists without clearing the active list, leading to
+ * confusion.
*/
- while (!list_empty(&ring->active_list)) {
- struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
-
- obj = list_first_entry(&ring->active_list,
- struct drm_i915_gem_object,
- ring_list);
-
- if (!i915_gem_request_completed(obj->last_read_req, true))
- break;
-
- i915_gem_object_move_to_inactive(obj);
- }
-
-
while (!list_empty(&ring->request_list)) {
struct drm_i915_gem_request *request;
@@ -2700,6 +2687,23 @@ i915_gem_retire_requests_ring(struct intel_engine_cs *ring)
i915_gem_free_request(request);
}
+ /* Move any buffers on the active list that are no longer referenced
+ * by the ringbuffer to the flushing/inactive lists as appropriate,
+ * before we free the context associated with the requests.
+ */
+ while (!list_empty(&ring->active_list)) {
+ struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj;
+
+ obj = list_first_entry(&ring->active_list,
+ struct drm_i915_gem_object,
+ ring_list);
+
+ if (!i915_gem_request_completed(obj->last_read_req, true))
+ break;
+
+ i915_gem_object_move_to_inactive(obj);
+ }
+
if (unlikely(ring->trace_irq_req &&
i915_gem_request_completed(ring->trace_irq_req, true))) {
ring->irq_put(ring);
--
2.1.4
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
