Re: [PATCH v4 23/23] drm/msm: Don't implicit-sync if only a single ring

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

 



On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 10:34 AM Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 08:49:14PM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:20 AM Lucas Stach <l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fr, 2020-10-23 at 09:51 -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > If there is only a single ring (no-preemption), everything is FIFO order
> > > > and there is no need to implicit-sync.
> > > >
> > > > Mesa should probably just always use MSM_SUBMIT_NO_IMPLICIT, as behavior
> > > > is undefined when fences are not used to synchronize buffer usage across
> > > > contexts (which is the only case where multiple different priority rings
> > > > could come into play).
> > >
> > > Really, doesn't this break cross-device implicit sync? Okay, you may
> > > not have many peripherals that rely on implicit sync on devices where
> > > Adreno is usually found, but it seems rather heavy-handed.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't it be better to only ignore fences from your own ring context
> > > in the implicit sync, like we do in the common DRM scheduler
> > > (drm_sched_dependency_optimized)?
> >
> > we already do this.. as was discussed on an earlier iteration of this patchset
> >
> > But I'm not aware of any other non-gpu related implicit sync use-case
> > (even on imx devices where display is decoupled from gpu).. I'll
> > revert the patch if someone comes up with one, but otherwise lets let
> > the implicit sync baggage die
>
> The thing is, dma_resv won't die, even if implicit sync is dead. We're
> using internally for activity tracking and memory management. If you don't
> set these, then we can't share generic code with msm, and I think everyone
> inventing their own memory management is a bit a mistake.
>
> Now you only kill the implicit write sync stuff here, but I'm not sure
> that's worth much since you still install all the read fences for
> consistency. And if userspace doesn't want to be synced, they can set the
> flag and do this on their own: I think you should be able to achieve
> exactly the same thing in mesa.
>
> Aside: If you're worried about overhead, you can do O(1) submit if you
> manage your ppgtt like amdgpu does.

So just remember a use-case which is maybe a bit yucky, but it is
actually possible to implement race-free. If you have implicit sync.

There's screen-capture tool in mplayer and obs which capture your
compositor by running getfb2 in a loop. It works, and after some
initial screaming I realized it does actually work race-free. If you
have implicit sync.

I really don't think you can sunset this, as much as you want to. And
sunsetting it inconsistently is probably the worst.
-Daniel

> -Daniel
>
> >
> > BR,
> > -R
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Lucas
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Kristian H. Kristensen <hoegsberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c | 7 ++++---
> > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c
> > > > index d04c349d8112..b6babc7f9bb8 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_submit.c
> > > > @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ static int submit_lock_objects(struct msm_gem_submit *submit)
> > > >       return ret;
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > > -static int submit_fence_sync(struct msm_gem_submit *submit, bool no_implicit)
> > > > +static int submit_fence_sync(struct msm_gem_submit *submit, bool implicit_sync)
> > > >  {
> > > >       int i, ret = 0;
> > > >
> > > > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ static int submit_fence_sync(struct msm_gem_submit *submit, bool no_implicit)
> > > >                               return ret;
> > > >               }
> > > >
> > > > -             if (no_implicit)
> > > > +             if (!implicit_sync)
> > > >                       continue;
> > > >
> > > >               ret = msm_gem_sync_object(&msm_obj->base, submit->ring->fctx,
> > > > @@ -774,7 +774,8 @@ int msm_ioctl_gem_submit(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
> > > >       if (ret)
> > > >               goto out;
> > > >
> > > > -     ret = submit_fence_sync(submit, !!(args->flags & MSM_SUBMIT_NO_IMPLICIT));
> > > > +     ret = submit_fence_sync(submit, (gpu->nr_rings > 1) &&
> > > > +                     !(args->flags & MSM_SUBMIT_NO_IMPLICIT));
> > > >       if (ret)
> > > >               goto out;
> > > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dri-devel mailing list
> > dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch



-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux