Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Workaround incoherence between fences and LLC across multiple CPUs

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

 



On 04/08/2013 11:54 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 09:03:27AM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
On Thu,  4 Apr 2013 21:31:03 +0100
Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In order to fully serialize access to the fenced region and the update
to the fence register we need to take extreme measures on SNB+, and
manually flush writes to memory prior to writing the fence register in
conjunction with the memory barriers placed around the register write.

Fixes i-g-t/gem_fence_thrash

v2: Bring a bigger gun
v3: Switch the bigger gun for heavier bullets (Arjan van de Ven)
v4: Remove changes for working generations.
v5: Reduce to a per-cpu wbinvd() call prior to updating the fences.
v6: Rewrite comments to ellide forgotten history.

Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62191
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@xxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Jon Bloomfield <jon.bloomfield@xxxxxxxxx> (v2)
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c |   28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
index fa4ea1a..8f7739e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
@@ -2689,17 +2689,35 @@ static inline int fence_number(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
  	return fence - dev_priv->fence_regs;
  }

+static void i915_gem_write_fence__ipi(void *data)
+{
+	wbinvd();
+}
+
  static void i915_gem_object_update_fence(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
  					 struct drm_i915_fence_reg *fence,
  					 bool enable)
  {
-	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = obj->base.dev->dev_private;
-	int reg = fence_number(dev_priv, fence);
-
-	i915_gem_write_fence(obj->base.dev, reg, enable ? obj : NULL);
+	struct drm_device *dev = obj->base.dev;
+	struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = dev->dev_private;
+	int fence_reg = fence_number(dev_priv, fence);
+
+	/* In order to fully serialize access to the fenced region and
+	 * the update to the fence register we need to take extreme
+	 * measures on SNB+. In theory, the write to the fence register
+	 * flushes all memory transactions before, and coupled with the
+	 * mb() placed around the register write we serialise all memory
+	 * operations with respect to the changes in the tiler. Yet, on
+	 * SNB+ we need to take a step further and emit an explicit wbinvd()
+	 * on each processor in order to manually flush all memory
+	 * transactions before updating the fence register.
+	 */
+	if (HAS_LLC(obj->base.dev))
+		on_each_cpu(i915_gem_write_fence__ipi, NULL, 1);
+	i915_gem_write_fence(dev, fence_reg, enable ? obj : NULL);

  	if (enable) {
-		obj->fence_reg = reg;
+		obj->fence_reg = fence_reg;
  		fence->obj = obj;
  		list_move_tail(&fence->lru_list, &dev_priv->mm.fence_list);
  	} else {

I almost wish x86 just gave up and went fully weakly ordered.  At least
then we'd know we need barriers everywhere, rather than just in
mystical places.

Reviewed-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Queued for -next, thanks for the patch. I am a bit unhappy that the
testcase doesn't work too well and can't reliably reproduce this on all
affected machines. But I've tried a bit to improve things and it's very
fickle. I guess we just have to accept this :(

Under real-time conditions when we expect deterministic response to
external and internal events at any time within a couple of
microseconds, invalidating and flushing the entire cache in a running
system is unacceptable. This is introducing latencies of several
milliseconds which was clearly shown in RT regression tests on a kernel
with this patch applied (https://www.osadl.org/?id=1543#c7602). We
therefore have to revert it in the RT patch queue - kind of a
workaround of a workaround.

Would simply be wonderful, if we could get rid of the hateful wbinvd().

	-Carsten.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]