Re: [PATCH 10/11] drm/i915: Mark the context and address space as closed

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

 




On 17/12/15 14:26, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 02:15:52PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
+static void i915_ppgtt_close(struct i915_address_space *vm)
+{
+	struct list_head *phases[] = {
+		&vm->active_list,
+		&vm->inactive_list,
+		&vm->unbound_list,
+		NULL,
+	}, **phase;
+
+	RQ_BUG_ON(vm->is_ggtt);
+	RQ_BUG_ON(vm->closed);
+	vm->closed = true;
+
+	for (phase = phases; *phase; phase++) {
+		struct i915_vma *vma, *vn;
+
+		list_for_each_entry_safe(vma, vn, *phase, vm_link)
+			i915_vma_close(vma);
+	}
+}

Hm so VMAs get unlinked from everywhere, but then on retire goes
back to inactive. Is it not a bit weird?

Very weird. In the end, I have to stop unlinking in i915_vma_close()
from the vm lists.

Why it is needed to unlink VMAs from everywhere when marking them as closed?

Indeed, it was just to try and keep this walk short. But I realised that
this would actually also foul up the evict/shrinker (by hiding objects
from them that should be thrown away).

And actually on retire objects are ahead of VMAs in the
req->active_list so the last object unreference happens before the
last vma is retired, which is even weirder.

Am I missing something?

That shouldn't happen. The i915_gem_object_retire_read is run after the
i915_vma_retire.

I had added some commentary to i915_vma_move_to_active() that hopefully
explains the interdependences between retire callbacks (mostly to try
and prevent breakage later).

@@ -1075,7 +1075,13 @@ void i915_vma_move_to_active(struct i915_vma *vma,

         obj->dirty = 1; /* be paranoid  */

-       /* Add a reference if we're newly entering the active list. */
+       /* Add a reference if we're newly entering the active list.
+        * The order in which we add operations to the retirement queue is
+        * vital here: mark_active adds to the start of the callback list,
+        * such that subsequent callbacks are called first. Therefore we
+        * add the active reference first and queue for it to be dropped
+        * *last*.
+        */

I don't know how I concluded active VMA is after the active object, and I specifically saw the order and list_move.

Again, very good to document that, so something good at least came out of it. :)


Regards,

Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux