Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> [ text/plain ]
>
>
> On 04/12/2016 04:51 PM, 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>
>
> Tested-by: Abdiel Janulgue <abdiel.janulgue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Patch pushed to dinq. Thanks for patch, review and testing.
-Mika
>
>
>> 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);
>> }
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
