On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 08:56:40PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 04:43:52PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:49:18PM +0300, Mika Kuoppala wrote: > > > Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 06:53:41PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 07:11:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > >> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 05:06:36PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > >> > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 05:35:18PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > >> > > > We load the ppgtt ptes once per gpu reset/driver load/resume and > > > >> > > > that's all that's needed. Note that this only blows up when we're > > > >> > > > using the allocate_va_range funcs and not the special-purpose ones > > > >> > > > used. With this change we can get rid of that duplication. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Honestly, I would prefer the test to be rewritten so that the > > > >> > > information on which vm was being used was passed along and not that > > > >> > > magic sprinkled in the middle of nowhere. e.g. execbuffer knows exactly > > > >> > > what vm it bound the objects into, and yet towards the end we decide to > > > >> > > guess again. Also, I would rather the execbuffer test be moved to > > > >> > > i915_gem_context since it is scattering internal knowledge about. > > > >> > > > > >> > Yeah I agree that there's more room for cleanup. I've done this minimal > > > >> > patch purely to shut up the bogus WARN_ONs when I tried to unify the > > > >> > gen6/7 pt alloc code in the next patch. Since it's bogus. > > > >> > > > >> How about: > > > > > > > > Yeah, but imo there's also more. I tried to understand the gen8 legacy ctx > > > > switch logic and failed, and I wasn't fully convinced that the gen7 one > > > > won't WARN if we actually enable full ppgtt. Given all that I decided to > > > > go with the most minimal patch and just removed the offending bogus WARN. > > > > But Mika/Michel promised to hang around for eventual cleanups? > > > > > > Yes. There is more to come after this series. > > > I can include Chris's suggestion. > > > > Looking at this WARN that fires continually on gen6/gen7, (it's nice to > > have such a blatant WARN to explain the perf decrease), don't we need > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > index a1a9f5dad541..006d4a2610f7 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_gtt.c > > @@ -1562,6 +1562,8 @@ int i915_ppgtt_init_hw(struct drm_device *dev) > > ret = ppgtt->switch_mm(ppgtt, ring); > > if (ret != 0) > > return ret; > > + > > + ppgtt->pd_dirty_rings &= ~(1 << i); > > } > > } > > Yeah, but I didn't really see the point in the debug infrastructure for > aliasing ppgtt. The pde loading is done somewhere completely else than for > full ppgtt. And if we forget to load the pdes the effects are obvious, > whereas failing to reload when changes happen with full ppgtt is much > harder to spot quickly. So I opted to undo those checks again, they have > been defunct before my changes anyway. This performance regression is still unfixed. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
