On 12/04/16 14:51, Michał Winiarski wrote:
We started to use PIPE_CONTROL to write render ring seqno in order to
combat seqno write vs interrupt generation problems. This was introduced
by commit 7c17d377374d ("drm/i915: Use ordered seqno write interrupt
generation on gen8+ execlists").
On gen8+ size of PIPE_CONTROL with Post Sync Operation should be
6 dwords. When we're using older 5-dword variant it's possible to
observe inconsistent values written by PIPE_CONTROL with Post
Sync Operation from user batches, resulting in rendering corruptions.
v2: Fix BAT failures
v3: Comments on alignment and thrashing high dword of seqno (Chris)
v4: Updated commit msg (Mika)
Testcase: igt/gem_pipe_control_store_loop/*-qword-write
Issue: VIZ-7393
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
index 0d6dc5e..30abe53 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
@@ -1945,15 +1945,18 @@ static int gen8_emit_request_render(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request)
struct intel_ringbuffer *ringbuf = request->ringbuf;
int ret;
- ret = intel_logical_ring_begin(request, 6 + WA_TAIL_DWORDS);
+ ret = intel_logical_ring_begin(request, 8 + WA_TAIL_DWORDS);
if (ret)
return ret;
+ /* We're using qword write, seqno should be aligned to 8 bytes. */
+ BUILD_BUG_ON(I915_GEM_HWS_INDEX & 1);
+
/* w/a for post sync ops following a GPGPU operation we
* need a prior CS_STALL, which is emitted by the flush
* following the batch.
*/
- intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, GFX_OP_PIPE_CONTROL(5));
+ intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, GFX_OP_PIPE_CONTROL(6));
intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf,
(PIPE_CONTROL_GLOBAL_GTT_IVB |
PIPE_CONTROL_CS_STALL |
@@ -1961,7 +1964,10 @@ static int gen8_emit_request_render(struct drm_i915_gem_request *request)
intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, hws_seqno_address(request->engine));
intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, 0);
intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, i915_gem_request_get_seqno(request));
+ /* We're thrashing one dword of HWS. */
+ intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, 0);
intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, MI_USER_INTERRUPT);
+ intel_logical_ring_emit(ringbuf, MI_NOOP);
return intel_logical_ring_advance_and_submit(request);
}
In the scheduler+preemption patches, we actually make use of the fact
that we're writing a QWord, so that we can set the completed-seqno and
clear the in-progress seqno in one operation (it doesn't actually matter
if the h/w turns it into two DWord writes, though).
.Dave.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
